Bendix King AV80R Display

[johngalloway[_2_]]

Does anyone know whether the LCD display for this unit is
transflective or transmissive?

Thanks,

John Galloway

[Paul Remde]

Hi John,

I don't have an answer to your question, but I can tell you that it is
significantly brighter in sunlight than my iPAQ 310. My iPAQ 310 is
significantly brighter than my iPAQ 4700.

You can read my review of the AV8OR and AV8OR ACE here:
http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/pda.htm#AV8OR

Best Regards,

Paul Remde

"johngalloway" > wrote in message
...
> Does anyone know whether the LCD display for this unit is
> transflective or transmissive?
>
> Thanks,
>
> John Galloway

[Darryl Ramm]

On Oct 18, 12:35*pm, johngalloway > wrote:
> Does anyone know whether the LCD display for this unit is
> transflective or transmissive?
>
> Thanks,
>
> John Galloway

All those hits when you Google "AV80R transflective" did not convince
you?

Almost all modern displays are transrflective.

There is some very interesting display technoloy coming from Pixel Qi
that combines reflective mode with transflective. Essentially
monochrome with some color "hinting" in reflective mode. Georgeous
displays, high resolution, low power consumption. I expect they'll
find their ways into out cockpits through future netbook/tablet/PDA
type devices. www.pixelqi.com.

Darryl

[Richard[_9_]]

On Oct 18, 12:39*pm, "Paul Remde" > wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> I don't have an answer to your question, but I can tell you that it is
> significantly brighter in sunlight than my iPAQ 310. *My iPAQ 310 is
> significantly brighter than my iPAQ 4700.
>
> You can read my review of the AV8OR and AV8OR ACE here:http://www.cumulus-soaring.com/pda.htm#AV8OR
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Paul Remde
>
> "johngalloway" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
>
>
> > Does anyone know whether the LCD display for this unit is
> > transflective or transmissive?
>
> > Thanks,
>
> > John Galloway- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

If you want to see comparison pictures of the Ipaq 310, Ipaq 4700 to a
display that really is sunlight readable.

http://www.craggyaero.com/ultimate.htm

Richard
www.craggyaero.com

[johngalloway[_2_]]

On Oct 18, 8:51*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
> On Oct 18, 12:35*pm, johngalloway > wrote:
>
> > Does anyone know whether the LCD display for this unit is
> > transflective or transmissive?
>
> > Thanks,
>
> > John Galloway
>
> All those hits when you Google "AV80R transflective" did not convince
> you?
>
> Almost all modern displays are transrflective.
>
> There is some very interesting display technoloy coming from Pixel Qi
> that combines reflective mode with transflective. Essentially
> monochrome with some color "hinting" in reflective mode. Georgeous
> displays, high resolution, low power consumption. I expect they'll
> find their ways into out cockpits through future netbook/tablet/PDA
> type devices.www.pixelqi.com.
>
> Darryl

I get only a few hits to that search - many of them now point to my
own question, above, and and I can't find any that actually refer to
the AV80R and not another product also being sold.

The Ipaq 310 series isn't transflective.

What about Mirasol displays?

http://www.mirasoldisplays.com/index-mirasol-display-technology.php

John Galloway

[bildan]

On Oct 19, 2:26*am, johngalloway > wrote:
> On Oct 18, 8:51*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 18, 12:35*pm, johngalloway > wrote:
>
> > > Does anyone know whether the LCD display for this unit is
> > > transflective or transmissive?
>
> > > Thanks,
>
> > > John Galloway
>
> > All those hits when you Google "AV80R transflective" did not convince
> > you?
>
> > Almost all modern displays are transrflective.
>
> > There is some very interesting display technoloy coming from Pixel Qi
> > that combines reflective mode with transflective. Essentially
> > monochrome with some color "hinting" in reflective mode. Georgeous
> > displays, high resolution, low power consumption. I expect they'll
> > find their ways into out cockpits through future netbook/tablet/PDA
> > type devices.www.pixelqi.com.
>
> > Darryl
>
> I get only a few hits to that search - many of them now point to my
> own question, above, and and I can't find any that actually refer to
> the AV80R and not another product also being sold.
>
> The Ipaq 310 series isn't transflective.
>
> What about Mirasol displays?
>
> http://www.mirasoldisplays.com/index-mirasol-display-technology.php
>
> John Galloway

Mirasol falls in the general category of "Photonic Ink Displays".
See: http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/23754/ As I understand
it, Qualcomm doesn't see Mirasol as a large area display tech.

They're not yet ready for prime time yet but the promise is huge.
Besides being paper thin, they exhibit huge contrast and color
saturation in direct sunlight with trivial power consumption. In
other words, potentially a perfect glider cockpit display.

The present goal is a color E-Reader with the resolution and color
saturation of a magazine cover.

[Darryl Ramm]

On Oct 19, 1:26*am, johngalloway > wrote:
> On Oct 18, 8:51*pm, Darryl Ramm > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 18, 12:35*pm, johngalloway > wrote:
>
> > > Does anyone know whether the LCD display for this unit is
> > > transflective or transmissive?
>
> > > Thanks,
>
> > > John Galloway
>
> > All those hits when you Google "AV80R transflective" did not convince
> > you?
>
> > Almost all modern displays are transrflective.
>
> > There is some very interesting display technoloy coming from Pixel Qi
> > that combines reflective mode with transflective. Essentially
> > monochrome with some color "hinting" in reflective mode. Georgeous
> > displays, high resolution, low power consumption. I expect they'll
> > find their ways into out cockpits through future netbook/tablet/PDA
> > type devices.www.pixelqi.com.
>
> > Darryl
>
> I get only a few hits to that search - many of them now point to my
> own question, above, and and I can't find any that actually refer to
> the AV80R and not another product also being sold.
>
> The Ipaq 310 series isn't transflective.
>
> What about Mirasol displays?
>
> http://www.mirasoldisplays.com/index-mirasol-display-technology.php
>
> John Galloway

I'll agree this stuff *is* buried. I wish the manufacturers would just
list this info in their specs. Honeywell does for their higher-end
portable MFD's (transflective) but not that lower-end AV8OR. My Garmin
496 is transflective and Garmin has also randomly seems to describe
this in different product specs or not.

The iPAQ 310 series *is* transflective. As Google "iPAQ 310
tranflective" would lead you to think...(oh never mind :-)) or just
looking at it shows. The iPAQ 310 looks great indoors but does wash
out in sunlight. People disagree on the difference indoors and
outdoors between say the iPAQ 310 and iPAQ 4700. Both transflective.
But one difference is the backlight is cold cathode on the 4700 and
LED on the iPAQ 310. Some 4700 backlights will be showing their age
and losing brightness and the LED backlight has a "crisper" more
bluish-white color. For example I own two 4700 and a 310. The 310 to
me looks much better indoors than my 4700, but there is not much
difference in sunlight. This also depends on the person and their age
since the percieved contrast will vary.


Mirasole and other MEMS type displays may be coming but there are lots
of technical challenges to get new technology like this to market and
in a form factor interesting to us. I'll give all these guys more
credibility when I see them actually shipping displays in volume, for
cell phone and other small screen applications. Another company to
watch is Pixtronix. If this technology does make it to market it will
be interesting.

Darryl

[Richard[_9_]]

On Oct 18, 12:35*pm, johngalloway > wrote:
> Does anyone know whether the LCD display for this unit is
> transflective or transmissive?
>
> Thanks,
>
> John Galloway

John,

Sunlight readabiltiy of a display does not have that much to do with
Transflective or Transmissive.

The key items are:

Touchscreen - extremely bad for sunlight readabiltiy produces
glare you can see this on most PDA and or phones. To see the
displays better you have to tilt them to get the correct light on the
screen.
Coatings on the Screen - coatings depending on the type significantly
reduce sunlight glare. 2 different coatings are required to have
good sunlight readability.
Contrast ratio - 11 to 1
Brightness - 1000 -1800 nits (cd/m2) this backlight will produce a
very readable screen.


Richard
www.craggyaero.com

[johngalloway[_2_]]

On Oct 20, 3:59*pm, Richard > wrote:
> On Oct 18, 12:35*pm, johngalloway > wrote:
>
> > Does anyone know whether the LCD display for this unit is
> > transflective or transmissive?
>
> > Thanks,
>
> > John Galloway
>
> John,
>
> Sunlight readabiltiy of a display does not have that much to do with
> Transflective or Transmissive.
>
> The key items are:
>
> Touchscreen *- extremely bad for *sunlight readabiltiy *produces
> glare *you can see this on most PDA and or phones. *To see the
> displays better you have to tilt them to get the correct light on the
> screen.
> Coatings on the Screen - coatings depending on the type significantly
> reduce sunlight glare. * 2 different coatings *are required to have
> good sunlight readability.
> Contrast ratio - 11 to 1
> Brightness - 1000 -1800 nits (cd/m2) *this backlight will produce a
> very readable screen.
>
> Richardwww.craggyaero.com

Richard, I like SeeYou Mobile and I like much about the Ultimate so
if it was smaller, cheaper and I lived in the US I would probably buy
one.

Why I asked the original question is that most references to the Ipaq
31* series that I have read describe the display as "transmissive"
although there are some that describe it as transflective which is how
the 4700 display is always described. I own both types and the
displays are clearly different in nature:

The 4700 display shows up (rather dimly because the observer's pupils
are shut down) under direct sunlight and it makes virtually no
difference whether the backlight is on or off. It clearly works in a
reflective way. With the 310 the backlight must be on maximum to be
visible at all with the sun on the screen - and reflections mean that
the screen is unuseable in that scenario. (Fortunately it is easy to
angle the 310 in flight so that condition is rare)

On the other hand the 4700 has poorer full backlight brightness than
the 310 series and the latter has better visibility in indirect bright
sunlight.

The AV80R is just about affordable, a familiar size, seems to be
brighter than both of the above, runs SYM, and has the right
connectors for integrateing with glider instruments so if it has a
transflective screen (as seems likely) then I think it might be worth
considering. Pity about the low resolution however.

John Galloway

[Darryl Ramm]

On Oct 21, 12:30*am, johngalloway > wrote:
> On Oct 20, 3:59*pm, Richard > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 18, 12:35*pm, johngalloway > wrote:
>
> > > Does anyone know whether the LCD display for this unit is
> > > transflective or transmissive?
>
> > > Thanks,
>
> > > John Galloway
>
> > John,
>
> > Sunlight readabiltiy of a display does not have that much to do with
> > Transflective or Transmissive.
>
> > The key items are:
>
> > Touchscreen *- extremely bad for *sunlight readabiltiy *produces
> > glare *you can see this on most PDA and or phones. *To see the
> > displays better you have to tilt them to get the correct light on the
> > screen.
> > Coatings on the Screen - coatings depending on the type significantly
> > reduce sunlight glare. * 2 different coatings *are required to have
> > good sunlight readability.
> > Contrast ratio - 11 to 1
> > Brightness - 1000 -1800 nits (cd/m2) *this backlight will produce a
> > very readable screen.
>
> > Richardwww.craggyaero.com
>
> Richard, *I like SeeYou Mobile and I like much about the Ultimate so
> if it was smaller, cheaper and I lived in the US I would probably buy
> one.
>
> Why I asked the original question is that most references to the Ipaq
> 31* series that I have read describe the display as "transmissive"
> although there are some that describe it as transflective which is how
> the 4700 display is always described. *I own both types and the
> displays are clearly different in nature:
>
> The 4700 display shows up (rather dimly because the observer's pupils
> are shut down) under direct sunlight and it makes virtually no
> difference whether the backlight is on or off. *It clearly works in a
> reflective way. *With the 310 the backlight must be on maximum to be
> visible at all with the sun on the screen - and reflections mean that
> the screen is unuseable in that scenario. (Fortunately it is easy to
> angle the 310 in flight so that condition is rare)
>
> On the other hand the 4700 has poorer full backlight brightness than
> the 310 series and the latter has better visibility in indirect bright
> sunlight.
>
> The AV80R is just about affordable, a familiar size, seems to be
> brighter than both of the above, runs SYM, *and has the right
> connectors for integrateing with glider instruments so if it has a
> transflective screen (as seems likely) then I think it might be worth
> considering. *Pity about the low resolution however.
>
> John Galloway

Again the 310 etc. is transflective. On a typical indoor computer
display that is transmissive, if you turn down fully the backlight you
will see nothing even with ambient light. That simple test is a bit
hard to do with the 310 since it never turns off the backlight fully.

All the popular PNA and aviation portable displays are transflective.

I think this fixation has evolved from earlier iPAQs that had
reflective color displays (with front-light technology for indoor/
night use) and they had benefits in sunlight compared to later PDAs
with transflective displays. Now your options are all likely
transflective, so like Richard says it is other stuff you shoud worry
about. So many thigns in fact, and so dependent on individual vision
that it is often a good idea to look at what you are considering
buying (in direct sunlight if needed).

Darryl

[Mottley[_2_]]

On Oct 21, 8:30*am, johngalloway > wrote:
> On Oct 20, 3:59*pm, Richard > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 18, 12:35*pm, johngalloway > wrote:
>
> > > Does anyone know whether the LCD display for this unit is
> > > transflective or transmissive?
>
> > > Thanks,
>
> > > John Galloway
>
> > John,
>
> > Sunlight readabiltiy of a display does not have that much to do with
> > Transflective or Transmissive.
>
> > The key items are:
>
> > Touchscreen *- extremely bad for *sunlight readabiltiy *produces
> > glare *you can see this on most PDA and or phones. *To see the
> > displays better you have to tilt them to get the correct light on the
> > screen.
> > Coatings on the Screen - coatings depending on the type significantly
> > reduce sunlight glare. * 2 different coatings *are required to have
> > good sunlight readability.
> > Contrast ratio - 11 to 1
> > Brightness - 1000 -1800 nits (cd/m2) *this backlight will produce a
> > very readable screen.
>
> > Richardwww.craggyaero.com
>
> Richard, *I like SeeYou Mobile and I like much about the Ultimate so
> if it was smaller, cheaper and I lived in the US I would probably buy
> one.
>
> Why I asked the original question is that most references to the Ipaq
> 31* series that I have read describe the display as "transmissive"
> although there are some that describe it as transflective which is how
> the 4700 display is always described. *I own both types and the
> displays are clearly different in nature:
>
> The 4700 display shows up (rather dimly because the observer's pupils
> are shut down) under direct sunlight and it makes virtually no
> difference whether the backlight is on or off. *It clearly works in a
> reflective way. *With the 310 the backlight must be on maximum to be
> visible at all with the sun on the screen - and reflections mean that
> the screen is unuseable in that scenario. (Fortunately it is easy to
> angle the 310 in flight so that condition is rare)
>
> On the other hand the 4700 has poorer full backlight brightness than
> the 310 series and the latter has better visibility in indirect bright
> sunlight.
>
> The AV80R is just about affordable, a familiar size, seems to be
> brighter than both of the above, runs SYM, *and has the right
> connectors for integrateing with glider instruments so if it has a
> transflective screen (as seems likely) then I think it might be worth
> considering. *Pity about the low resolution however.
>
> John Galloway- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Hi John
Transmissive / Transflective
check it out at
http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0,2542,t=transmissive+LCD&i=55801,00.asp
Bruno