Did Sony drop ECO screen for FW Series?

http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs...52921665961655&categoryId=8198552921644564889

Sony no longer call the cheaper lower resolution screen as ECO screen. Instead, they simply call it "16.4" VAIO Display (1600x900)". Does it mean that the lower resolution model has the same brightness and color richness as the higher resolution 1920x1080 model? It doesn't seem to be. From the item description, this is what they say:

• 
  16.4" VAIO Display (1600x900)

• 
  16.4" VAIO extra-wide HD display (1920x1080) [add $100.00]
  

More Info
Display
VAIO Displays

VAIO Displays provide more brilliant colors, sharp contrast and crisp graphics. Also featured is a special, anti-reflective coating that lessens glare and light reflection.

VAIO extra-wide HD display In addition to the regular features of VAIO displays, Premium displays allow you to enjoy the clarity and brilliance of a 1080p HD viewing experience wherever you go on your FW Series notebook. Whether you're viewing a Blu-ray Disc™ movie, gaming, viewing photos, or just plowing through your workload, Premium displays delivers an industry-leading viewing experience marked by super-crisp hi-def detail, richer colors and a brighter display.

Does it mean that the lower resolution 1600x900 screen is identical with the ECO screen? Does it mean that they just changed the name and nothing else?

 

I don't know what industry VAIO thinks they're leading, but it ain't in notebook screen quality. Dell, Apple, even Sager all better screens, at the moment.

The real industry leader is the Dell XPS 16 Studio RGBLED screen.

 

The Dell RGBLED and Sony TrueHD screen resolution are 1080p which is way too high for a 16 or 16.4" screen. And believe me I have tried very hard to like it, manipulate it by adjusting the DPI and I have never been able to bring myself to get used to it. As long as nobody brings HiColor quality with a 16.4" screen, I would stick with my FW1 which is the only notebook that has such a screen.

 

Guess so much waiting for nothing...

I ordered my Dell SXPS 16 few days ago...

 

I totally agree with you. The FW190 screen is the leader. The only way I could "adjust" to the FullHD was by using the zoom feature and that only worked well if there weren't a gazillion processes running in the background.

In another posting on one of the threads about FW screens, I gave links and references concerning the fact that RGB is not the industry leader -- different standards are evolving which surpass it. And adjusting it can be a pain. So, I take with a grain of salt all of these genuflections before a Dell RGBLED made by persons who have not seen the FW5 screens yet. A Dell RBGLED is still a Dell, after all -- so it likely overheats and is more cheaply made than a Sony.

My hunch is that the Eco is possibly now an LED-backlit screen but not necessarily a HiColor screen. Dell has had all LED screens for almost a year now and the ones I have seen could not hold a candle to the FW190's HiColor. So, LED is not the deciding factor -- the color richness and the overall brightness capabilities are.

Also, I found that the Sony FullHD on the FW390 was NOT as bright a screen as the HiColor either. But Sony Style sites in some other countries are saying that these FW5 (and some FW4) screens have been newly developed -- and the UK adds that the lower res screen is now LED.

I don't think we will know anything for sure about LED or not until we see the EPEAT ratings on a configuration by configuration basis. Just as when Dell converted to all-LED displays there was a period of transition where some configs of the same model still had CCFLs, so, too, I believe that Sony is in a transition period. Some factories producing FWs may have LEDs while others do not. Thus, it is no surprise that SONY is not making any consistent claims about LEDs in all countries.

Once a few people get to put the FW5 series side by side with earlier FWs we should know a bit more (and when the EPEAT ratings come out as well). Until then, we are all just "spec"-ulating.

 

If anybody see FW5 screen at 1600x900, please tell us what you see. I would be very interested to know how the screen compares to the ECO screen. Most likely they are identical although I could be wrong.

Frys and Bestbuy will have them soon. So, we should be able to get a report from forum members soon.

 

I don't get all the complaining about the FW 1080P screen. I've had mine for nearly two weeks now and it is by far the best looking laptop screen I have ever owned. Much better than the XPS 16 screens that I have seen (though I haven't seen the RGB screen). Just because it isn't LED based doesn't make it bad. It's extremely bright, has great color accuracy, and I haven't had any trouble reading text yet. Blurays on this thing are mind-blowing. And thats coming from somebody who normally watches blurays on a 60 inch 1080P SXRD television. I love this laptop.

 

I totally understand your point and I don't want to make it sound like the FW FullHD screens are bad. They are not. In fact, they look great - if you never saw the HiColor. The FW490 was supposed to replace the AR590 that I had that broke. That VAIO had a 1920x1200 XBrite HiColor screen that was gorgeous. Very glossy, bright and nice. However, the FW, while good, was not as good as the AR590 I had.

Screens are rated subjectively. A great screen is only great if you haven't seen something better. For those of you who haven't, congrats and enjoy your FW. For those of us who were lucky (or unlucky) to have seen something better, the FW doesn't cut it.

 

Well, if we ended up getting a FW590 instead of a FW490, then we completely wasted our time, as the "updates" were trivial.

However, if we ended up getting a Sager NP8960 or an i7 Dell SXPS 16, neither of which were available in the summer, then we didn't.

I'm checking out the FW500 series in person on the 22nd. If it's the same screen as the FW490, I'm probably going with the SPXS, unless more reviews come out about the NP8690 that back up the early claims of how good it is.

 

That's a pretty broad assumption to make. While I haven't seen the FW FullHD screen, I have seen the Z XBRITE-DuraView screen and it's supposed to be one of the best Sony screens. No doubt, it was amazing but I'm not doing photography and I won't be comparing that screen to my FW's so for me, as long as the screen works and blues are blue (or relatively close to), then it's fine. If you think the FW Eco-screen sucks, you should see my old Toshiba's TFT screen, torture to the eyes (even for me).

You also forgot to factor in the price. Is the RGBLED LCD screen worth the $400 tag (in Canada)? For me, not in my dreams would I pay so much for a screen that has a marginal better colour reproduction, especially on a Dell laptop that will no doubt have other problems. On the other hand, the FW FullHD is only a $100-option and definitely worth it.

At the end of the day, I chose the FW primarily for its solid build quality, great cooling system, and amazing keyboard... and it cost me only $1,000 CDN... and so far, it served me well for a year and 2 months.

 

Hello there. I want you to ask guys if someone have seen this screen from FW? Is it one lamp LCD or not? Please... give me an answare!
Regards!

 

Update: I have just seen FW5 from a retail store. The screen is indeed ECO. So, apparently, Sony doesn't change a thing regarding with the screen.

After 4 refreshes, Sony never reintroduce the screen that I wanted. It looks like I would keep my FW190 until it breaks. It is the only FW in the US that comes with HiColor Screen at 1600x900.