FW490 XBRITE-FullHD screen speculation thread

I was just chatting with the Sony rep, and I was asking about the difference between XBRITE-ECO and XBRITE-FullHD. To my surprise, the rep told me the XBRITE-FullHD is LED backlit (which I think it's not true). I ask her to confirm that and she came back with the same answer.

Anyone can verify this?

 

I believe the XBRITE-Full HD display is CCFL dual-lamp backlit, making it very bright and more evenly lit than the ECO, but no, it is not LED to my knowledge.

 

Yep, Sony reps are all lies! They did a similar thing to me many times.

 

I've gotten the distinct impression, from more than one notebook manufacturer (including Sony), that the specs on screens are varying practically from shipment to shipment. This is no excuse for misinformation but it is a reason.

In the race to the bottom on prices, screens and other parts are being increasing outsourced. What else could be the reason for the dramatic changes seen in the performance of the dual-lamp screens of the FW series over the space of just one year? And that mysterious "multiple lamp" designation in European specs? Wouldn't that be a euphemism that covers both a dual-lamp CCFL and an LED?

The one thing about Sony though: If it was in writing or you can somehow prove the misrepresentation, Sony will attempt to assist you toward satisfaction of the client. This has NOT been true of Dell in my personal experience, unfortunately. Dell refunds your money at best and says good bye.

 

Just has another talk with a different sales rep.

Now I have email this chat to myself and print out a copy as well. Do you think this is proof enough for Sony if it turns out the screen is not LED-backlit?

 

It's dual-lamp screen. Don't listen to the reps.

 

I tend to agree: Don't listen to the reps. You're talking to the SALES reps, not the techs.

Try this: Email [email protected] -- this will get you to techs, and sometimes, if not most of the time, Level II techs in San Diego. Ask them to check the specs (don't let them shoot from the hip -- I've gotten misinformation that way when the memory confuses the models). Tell them two things: you want to buy the new model and you want them to pretend you need a new screen and to check the description of the part number if anything happens to the screen. Have the tech tell you what comes with the model in your geographic area and also give you the part number AND his/her name and ID number. (Usually, this is at the end of the email reply from that division.)

THEN you can believe that if that screen arrives and is different from whatever you were told, you will have a super solid case to raise holy h___ with [email protected].

Let us know, of course....

Good luck!

P.S. I cannot rule out that in some countries Sony may be introducing an LED backlit screen. In the States, the LED was on some smaller, business-oriented models and the RGB LED screen of the AW290 premium customized model. But, given that, for example, in Europe the advertising for the FW4 series has switched from calling the FullHD a "dual lamp" screen to a "multiple lamp" screen, it would seem that the change of verbiage is for a reason: to cover both dual-lamp CCFLs and LEDs which are, of course, composed of multiple little lamps! Depending on the factory, Sony might be beginning some conversions. After all, they are partnering with Sharp for screen production, etc. so who knows exactly what is on the horizon....

 

Well, thanks for the response, Derrida.

I have emailed my questions to [email protected], but I am still waiting for an answer.

In the meantime, I have emailed the Sony Email Response Team [email protected], and I got the following response:

Not sure what it means, as I am sure some Sony notebooks do not use LED-backlit screen.

 

Forward the email you sent to [email protected] to [email protected], say, midweek if you still have no reply. (Let's give the USA techs enough rope to either find the answers or hang themselves!)

I'm not sure the question is actually an easy one to answer -- I hope you remembered to indicate exactly which geographic region you'd be purchasing from. And that you were model-specific and asked for the replacement part number as well. These questions are designed to force the tech to actually consult a tech sheet rather than shoot from the hip. A response like the quote you were given is definitely not a researched reply because we KNOW from sites like Notebookcheck that CCFLs are all over the place....

The sonylistens email goes to the customer service guys who can put pressure on the techs if they do not respond. In my experience, the customer service people are far more responsible and responsive in the States than the tech teams in the States.

One of my American friends swears by the Sony tech team in the Philippines and even calls their direct phone number rather than the toll-free 800 number for the Americans!

 

It's very simple: Vaio FW only uses CCFL backlit screens.

The double lamp screen of the Vaio FW is a high quality screen that produces better brightness and contrast than many LED backlit screens.

When I buy a notebook I want a high quality screen. Whether it's CCFL or LED is of far less concern.

 

Hear, hear, Phil. Exactly!

In my experience, too, the CCFLs of Sony far exceeded the LEDs of competitors in the quality of the visual experience.

 

Thanks for the suggestion, Derrida.

To be honest, I will probably just go ahead and buy this laptop regardless. I was deciding between this Sony VAIO FW490 and the Dell Studio 1555. The latter offers DDR3 RAM, backlit keyword, and LED-backlit screen, and I was just hoping the FW490 have similar features. Anyway, I was at a BestBuy yesterday and I got to see he Studio 1555 in person. I might say the machine looks like a piece of toy, the plastic looks cheap and the assembly looks poor. I didn't see the FW490 on display, but at least I saw the NW series and it looks very good.

Is the FW490 at least as good as the NW180 in terms of built quality?

 

Yeah ppl said the build is solid. And i got one myself let me tell you. I am really happy with my machine. The design is good and thin the speaker is loud, the screen is nice the webcam is clear I love everything about this laptop. Only things i not happy with the machine is the ports yeah only 3 usb ports and they locate at right side of the laptop which make ur hand feel uncomfortable when you use wired mouse and ur table is not big enough. And adapter cable is not long enough.

 

I am very pleased with the laptop. Having moved from an SZ series with only 2 USB ports, 3 USBs are a luxury!! Personally, I find all wired mice irritating now that Logitech wireless mice are available with nanoreceivers. An Apple-style magnetic DC input adapter would have been absolutely ideal but you can't have everything.

 

I was in this same boat too and noticed the same things as you with the 1555. Lets not forget the absolute HORRID customer service coming from Dell these days.

Personally, if I have a problem with my computer, I like the idea i'm getting service locally at the sony store or with someone physically located in north america and not outsourced to India where your chances of getting help are dependent on the thickness of ones accent. That might sound like a low thing to say but that is the sad truth.

It's funny though because when I lived in Germany, I bought a Dell computer there and the service was excellent. Service provided was from someone that spoke German or English or sometimes Turkish and Russian. The last few times i called dell here in Canada just to ask a few simple questions were answered by someone who could barely speak english and EVERY SINGLE TIME I was told i was being transferred, the phone went on hold and then just went dead. If this is how Dell treats prospective buyers, then they just lost one in me.

Anyways sorry for the rant... I'm looking forward to ordering my FW490 this friday!!!

Cheers!

 

Dear friends
can sb tell me FullHD and Hicolor are consequences of each other in LCD technology or not? I mean if I buy a laptop with FullHD LCD then it'll be Hicolor? and again I'd like to know wich type of LCD is preferable for graphic and working with pictures (not just whaching movies, I mainly need to edit and print photoes in sRGB gamut).
Thanks every body

 

Yes. Just stay away from the ECO screen.

But the RGB LED screens available on Dell XPS 16 and Studio 17 (for example) would be even better for your work.

 

Unless Sony puts in its ads in the country where you are purchasing the computer the sentence that it now puts back in Europe when describing the FullHD, namely "100% color purity/fidelity", then I would not guarantee that the FullHD is a HiColor screen.

There's no way of getting around it: Sony is not advertizing the same thing about its screens in every country so it is likely that there are different suppliers and specs involved. I tried to get a Sony rep to give me specs on the FullHD screen in the States and the researched reply was: not possible. Further, we know from notebookjournal.de reviews of the HiColor FW190 and of each of its FW FullHD successors that the luminescence of the HiColors on the earlier FW and of other Vaio models often exceeds the FullHDs by 100 cd/m2 or more. Contrast results between the two screens are more similar, however. Clearly different technologies are in play.

It definitely will be a dual-lamp screen, however, which definitely improves the color feel in contrast to the Eco screen, and it appears to be a wide-gamut screen. And remember, Sony did offer an RGB LED on the AW line in the States until this year. It continues to offer it in Europe on the AW and has added back the "100% color purity/fidelity" to its FullHD ads in Europe on both the FW and the AW lines. These are clearly conscious marketing decisions corresponding to different hardware realities.

I myself have seen the FW190 HiColor and the FW390 FullHD side by side and there was a distinct difference (the HiColor one being a bit brighter and crisper looking) but it was subtle. Not like the dramatic difference between an Eco and the FullHD. And the luminescence on RGB LEDs is often about the same as that of the FullHD so you likely have no advantage there with a Dell.

I'd say stick with Sony; Dell will disappoint you more in almost everything. I've worked with both companies and only Sony goes the distance with you if you escalate a problem to management.

 

HiColor stands for dual lamp screen. I'm pretty sure about that. The Full HD screen is dual lamp, hence HiColor.

Calling it '100% color purity/fidelity' is inaccurate. Because it's not a 100% gamut screen, unlike the RGB LEDs.

 

I beg to differ. Dual lamps are a necessary but not sufficient condition for a HiColor CCFL screen. Larger screens without HiColor occasionally have two backlights.

Further, note that HiColor was developed by AU Optical for both CCFL and for RGB LED backlighting: http://auo.com/auoDEV/technology.php?sec=HiColor If HiColor were simply a matter of dual-lamp backlighting, then it would be nonsensical to advertize a HiColor RGB LED.

As for the gamut ranges, AUO's HiColor advertizes 92% of the gamut on a CCFL; its RGB LED 105%. Sony's HiColor, on the other hand, in earlier HiColor screens before the FW appeared, advertized a gamut in the high nineties, if I recall correctly. Around a year or so ago (around the appearance of the FW190 series), the advertisements were for 100% color purity. The link to backstage in the paragraph below bears that out.

Sony stopped using percentages in its advertizements in the U.S. and in Europe with the advent of the less luminescent FullHD, stating that there were multiple possible screens types (and my eyes have seen some of the differences): Eco single lamp, HiColor and FullHD dual lamp, DuraView LED ( http://backstage101.learningcenter.sony.us/tutorials/transcript.jsp?courseId=91114). But now, in Europe, with the reappearance of the 100% color purity/fidelity in FW4 ads (and remember, in Europe also they use the term "multiple-lamp" now instead of dual lamp as they did in the FW3 series) -- this leads me to believe that the technology has changed again and that a HiColor-like FullHD is available in some countries.

All that said, I have seen the dark LEDs of Dell's Studio line before the advent of the RGB LED. And I have experienced the multiple hardware issues on that line last year as well (defective hard drives, slot drives, speakers, screen backlighting). And, as I indicated, I have had extensive experience with customer and tech support with both Dell and Sony. You couldn't PAY me to work with Dell any more. Sony is superior in all ways.

That's my two cents. In the absence of absolute specs on any of these screens (the way one has them for televisions, for example), we're all just speculating anyway :GEEK: (all puns intended!).

 

We are in the Sony forum here talking about FW models. When it comes to Sony FW models dual lamp screens are HiColor. And HiColor screens are dual lamp.

What AUO calls HiColor is irrelevant because we are talking about Sony's HiColor.

No, Sony uses similar panels in all countries. The only thing different is the marketing. Sony has been notorious for all the mistakes the indivual countries make.

First generations of the Vaio FW had 1600*900 Dual Lamp as the best screen. It was called HiColor. Then it got replaced with the 1920*1080 Dual Lamp screen. That was called Full HD screen. They deliver the same colors.

And the gamuts on these screens do NOT reach 100%.

 

The above comments do not reflect the stated Sony tech support (as opposed to marketing) descriptions at the Sony backstage101 link. Sony makes distinctions among Eco, HiColor, FullHD, and Duraview screens which are relevant for an FW discussion since the FW line has had three of the four types of screens. And Sony indeed claims that some of its screens deliver up to 100% color purity/fidelity (aka "gamut") at the backstage101 link as well.

A Sony Level II tech in San Diego confirmed for me that the screens around the world do have differences and that Sony's trademarking of X-black reflects differences from X-Brite screens. These differences, he explained, often involve the different manufacturing standards and selling standards of various countries around the world. It is no secret, for example, that many American companies consider many of the ISO standards which Europe insists upon in the workplace to be unnecessary and costly standards which erode their bottom line.

It would therefore not surprise me in the least that Sony would introduce some screen innovations in some countries before others. We have already seen that the European FW lines had the ATI HD3650 and the 4650 in earlier refreshes than the American and Canadian lines.

In short, without spec sheets that provide the necessary detail, and based upon the dramatic variations in luminescence and contrast seen in reviews of these screens in different countries, I think we can all benefit from a realization of the limitations on any true certitude in these "spec"-ulations.

 

As I said before, individual countries claim all kinds of different things that are always proven wrong. We've seen this with battery life, bluetooth specs, and color depths of panels.

Dramatic variations in contrast between dual lamp FW screens? please show me.

 

OK I looked it up. 400:1 for the HiColor screen, 454:1 for the Full HD screen. So much for "spec"-ulation

That goes to show, the Full HD screen has slightly better contrast.

So the questions is whether to believe Sony's marketing machine or objective measurements. I guess my opinion is clear.

 

The funny thing is that on the UK sight it states that Vaios use LED back lighting.

http://www.sony.co.uk/hub/id/1201538224713/block/2

 

Well many VAIOs do use LED backlights so I can see where they're coming from.

 

Okay, here we go:

Here are the two test summaries on the HiColor and the FullHD in the FW series from notebookjournal.de:
FW3 FullHD http://www.notebookjournal.de/tests/inspection/notebook-review-sony-vaio-fw31zj-860
FW1 HiColor http://www.notebookjournal.de/tests/inspection/sony-vaio-vgn-fw11zu-619

And here's the direct comparison of the two from the FW3 review:

Ansichtssache
In Sachen Display gibt es eine weitere, kleine Änderung. Mit den gemessenen 274 cd/m² ist das Panel etwa 80 cd/m² dunkler als das des Vorgänger-Modells. Die Kontraste sind beim FW31 deutlich besser. Der gemessene Wert von 449:1 bei maximaler Helligkeit ist deutlich höher als das frühere Ergebnis von 357:1.
http://www.notebookjournal.de/tests/notebook-review-sony-vaio-fw31zj-860/2

And here's a link that shows that many manufacturers make the 16.4" size screen for FWs:
http://www.lcds4less.com/models/son...ny-vaio_vgn-vgn-fw_series-laptop-screens.html

I'm not sure that continuing to argue this point is getting us anywhere. The variations between the FW1 HiColor and the FW3 FullHD in the European market alone (much higher brightness on the HiColor but significantly higher contrast on the FullHD) tell us that many things are going on which we cannot document further without direct access to formal manufacturing specifications.

 

I have noted many times on this forum that Sony in Europe recently began using the term "multiple lamp technology" in its marketing for the FW whereas it previously used "dual lamp technology" in the marketing for earlier FW series.

I suspect the euphemism "multiple lamp technology" permits the transition from CCFL dual-lamps to LEDs into the FW line (phasing out older production CCFLs and introducing LEDs). No one I know uses the words "multiple lamp" to mean just two, either in German or in English.

That would also explain the new usage of the "100% color purity/fidelity" for the FullHD screens (perhaps with HiColor-like color technology) to distinguish them from lesser-gamut Ecos -- if they were both now LEDs.

And if they were transitioning screens within models, that would explain why this UK/GB Eco check site does not permit recent models to be entered: http://showcase.vaio.eu/landingpage/environmental_attributes/?locale=en_GB

But again, this is all "spec"-ulation on my part....

 

Measured at 100 cd/m (normal brightness): 400:1 for the HiColor screen, 454:1 for the Full HD. I don't know if you know Derrida but those differences can not be distinguished with the human eye.

And what the measurements of Notebookjournal actually prove is that it's actually the Full HD screen that deserves the label HiColor. Because the colors at the HiColor screen fade out at higher brightness.

You also hinted that some countries deliver HiColor Full HD screens while other countries don't. That is pure speculation in my opinion. I have not seen any proof or reasonable clues.

Claims that any of these screens have a 100% gamut are also pure speculation. And that's easy verifiable by starting a thread in the hardware forum and asking.

So now FW4 is using multiple LED backlights... you sure love to speculate don't you?

 

Sony is formally stating the following about its screens in its official "Sony XBRITE Technology" transcript (everything up to the link is a direct text cut and paste):

This tutorial will explore what makes XBRITE technology so special as well as help you understand how it can enhance your computing experience.

What Makes XBRITE™ Technology Special?
XBRITE™ LCD technology enhances display performance in four key areas:

Brightness: XBRITE LCDs utilize cutting-edge backlight technologies to ensure even light distribution across the entire screen. This helps produce richer, more pronounced images. Select Sony® VAIO® PC models even feature advanced LED (light emitting diode) backlights, which offer higher brightness while consuming less battery power.

Clarity: XBRITE LCDs employ two technologies to help ensure crystal-clear viewing. A glare filter reduces the refraction, or scattering, of outgoing light, while a special anti-reflective coating minimizes the reflection of ambient light without sacrificing brightness or definition. The end result is razor-sharp definition that makes everything look better, from spreadsheets and presentations to digital photos and high-definition movies.

Viewing Angle: Due to their ability to minimize glare and reflection, XBRITE LCDs also boast wide viewing angles, making it easier to share what's on your screen with friends, family, or co-workers.

Color Saturation: In addition to outstanding brightness, high clarity, and wide viewing angles, XBRITE LCDs also feature brilliant color saturation, up to 100 percent in certain Sony® VAIO® PC models, allowing you to enjoy vibrant, true-to-life color across all shades and hues.

Tip: Various XBRITE LCDs may employ any combination of these features but not necessarily all of them.
http://backstage101.learningcenter.sony.us/tutorials/transcript.jsp?courseId=91114

Just following Sony's lead from its officially-stated specs in my "spec"-ulations: any screen may have a combination of any or all of those features.

 

As you probably noticed, nowhere they're saying that the FW has a 100% gamut.

 

One more excerpt from backstage101. Note that Sony religiously avoids the use of any mention of specifically CCFL technologies (like dual or single lamp), referring only to "backlight technologies". At the time of the appearance of this Sony tutorial, there is mention of the appearance of Eco LEDs -- so Sony is NOT defining any of its screens in terms of single or dual-lamps here.

The newest Sony Europe online FW descriptions do indeed use words like "100% colour fidelity" which imply gamut ( http://vaio.sony.co.uk/view/ShowPro...voe_en_GB_cons&category=VN+FW+Series#sc2pair1). The slightly older tutorial below (FullHD first appeared in October, right?) uses "saturation" and not "fidelity" --- but current Sony Europe ads do. And the FW190 HiColor features description uses "100 percent color purity" still, even on the current U.S. Sony Style site:
http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs...cnetdf&productId=8198552921665748413#features

The paste-in from backstage101:

Four Levels of XBRITE™ Technology
Computers come in all shapes and sizes and serve all sorts of purposes, so why shouldn't their displays be tailored to match?

Sony® understands this, and has developed four levels of XBRITE™ optimized to match its wide range of VAIO® PCs.


XBRITE-ECO™: Optimized for notebook PCs, XBRITE-ECO displays utilize efficient backlight technologies for stunning all-around performance, making them an ideal choice for typical users who rely on their PC for everyday tasks, such as work, e-mail, and surfing the Internet. Select XBRITE-ECO models even feature cutting-edge LED backlights for higher brightness and energy-efficiency.

XBRITE-HiColor™: XBRITE-HiColor offers a step-up from XBRITE-ECO, with higher color saturation levels for greater color variation and a more vibrant picture. XBRITE-HiColor displays are a great choice for photographers, videographers, movie enthusiasts, or anyone else who requires high saturation and color accuracy.

XBRITE-DuraView™: XBRITE-DuraView displays utilize LED backlighting for high brightness and 100 percent color saturation, and also feature a special hardcoating to help protect against scratches and other wear-and-tear, making them the ideal choice for mobile users.

XBRITE-FullHD™: XBRITE-FullHD is the display of choice for power users who demand the absolute best in screen resolution. Available on select larger-screen notebooks and all-in-one PCs, XBRITE-FullHD displays feature Full HD 1080p resolution, perfect for enjoying Blu-ray Disc™ movies or editing home videos captured on one of today's HD camcorders.
http://backstage101.learningcenter.sony.us/tutorials/transcript.jsp?courseId=91114

 

In search of something concrete about the differences between the FW screen refreshes, and knowing that LEDs are mercury-free, led me (pardon the pun) to look at third-party materials-based documents -- like the American Energy Star and EPEAT standards.

No idea what this means completely, but the majority of the American FW1s and several FW450 and above series models (with the notable exception of the FW490) are listed as EPEAT and Energy Star compliant in the Sony FW series: http://www.epeat.net/PublicSearch.aspx (put in Sony, notebooks, 16.4", active and archived models for criteria).

If you add the optional criterion "4.1.3.2 Low threshold for amount of mercury used in light sources", again all of the American FW1 series and all listed American FW450 and up series models (but not the FW490) pass. But none of those models pass when you enter the "no mercury" criterion.

So it looks like possibly not all American Eco screens and not all American FW4 screens are created alike because the specs of the compliant FW4s are all Ecos without a single FullHD model listed (click on the model name in the list and the number of lamps is listed in the specs passed) while both the Eco and the FullHDs of the FW2 and FW3 series models failed EPEAT.

(Note that esupport's online spec sheets call some of the compliant models FullHD but, quite frankly, given errors there in the past, I think I trust the EPEAT site on this since they had to actually test the models for the reports.)

And remember how we wondered why FW490 CTO was not available when the pre-configured models already were? Different parts sourcing may be involved.

At the very least, this means that some of the materials in the American FW490 CTO and all of the American FW2 and FW3 notebook series are not EPEAT compliant or perhaps were produced in facilities that were not EPEAT compliant. This thus tells us that materials are indeed not necessarily the same across the refreshes of the FW.

Remember: all of the FW 190/290/390/490 CTOs are assembled in the U.S. so the fact that only the FW190 made the EPEAT list leads us to suspect that non-EPEAT materials (e.g., higher levels of mercury) are in the FW490 we're discussing on this thread.

And, when you check the device manager for the FW190 HiColor screen, its ID is MS_0000, a generic; when you check the FW31ZJ's FullHD it's a SNY07FA, clearly a Sony screen (both dual lamp CCFLs). The FW41E/H's Eco screen is a SNY06FA. The first is an American-sold FW, the latter two are European.

This would at the very least indicate that perhaps many of the earlier American FW1's HiColor screens by Sony were manufactured for Sony and not necessarily by Sony. (Ever wonder about that AUO HiColor site where they say that they developed HiColor?)

Anyone want to tell us what they see on their American or Canadian FW490 device manager for monitor hardware ID? And on any of the FW4 series that are on the EPEAT list above for comparison purposes?

Even though it might not be the screens which are bumping all American FW2s and FW3s -- as well as the FW490 CTO -- from EPEAT, it would still be interesting to see what the screen IDs are....

 

For what is worth, I did contact Sony technical support and sonylistens, but I still have not received any response from them. I will be ordering the FW490 CTO in the United State in the next few days, hopefully I can provide more information after I receive the laptop.

 

I just got a FW490 CTO with the ECO display. The hardware ID is SNY06FA. According to you, I have the same ECO display that Europeans get which either means A) My notebook meets EPEAT standards or B) It's not the display causing FWs sold in the US to fail EPEAT.

Anyway, I'm happy so far with my FW. A couple of months ago I saw the ECO display on a FW3xx and thought it looked washed out. Last month, I went to the Sonystyle store and noticed an improvement in the ECO display on a FW4xx. So I ordered, hoping the same improved panel would be sourced for US-made CTOs. To my relief upon turning on the FW, it was the same. It's not the best display I've seen, but it's still a good looking display. It's definitely better than most displays I've seen on Dell notebooks.

Again as far as EPEAT is concerned, maybe it meets it, maybe not. In a couple of years when I upgrade again. it probably won't be an issue as I suspect all US-sold notebooks will have to meet EPEAT standards.

 

The SNY06FA screen I reported on was in a FW41E/H European model. I have no idea whether that European model meets EPEAT standards because it is not an American model and is not listed at the EPEAT Website. However, as of today we do know that your FW490CTO is not listed as meeting EPEAT standards.

What we also know is that only some of the American FW4 series models meet EPEAT standards, that those that do meet them happen to be pre-configured models which have Eco screens ("1 lamp" is listed for those models in the EPEAT report), and that NONE of the FW490s are listed as meeting the standards. Since it is possible for a specific model to be approved with exceptions for certain variations listed, whatever is causing the FW490 to be rejected is in all of the FW490s, not just those with one type of screen.

So it is likely, as you suggest, that the Eco screen is not the issue. But to be sure, we would need to know the hardware IDs on some of the EPEAT-approved FW4s' screens to compare.

P.S. Here are the reported results on your FW490's screen when tested in the European model listed above:
Helligkeit und Kontrast
durchschnittl. Luminanz cd/m² 181,00
Schwarzwert bei 100 cd/m2 cd/m² 0,72
Schwarzwert bei maximaler Helligkeit cd/m² 1,35
Kontrast bei 100 cd/m2 :1 138,00
Kontrast bei maximaler Helligkeit :1 134,00
http://www.notebookjournal.de/tests/inspection/sony-vaio-vgn-fw41-e-h-933

 

Hi everyone.
Thanks for sharing the informations.
I'm in China,and I am very interested in sony FW490 CTO.As the very same model here ,it is called FW48 . The FW4s are all pre-configured models which have FULL-HD screens.I've learned that the FULL-HD screens are made by SHARP . http://www.screentekinc.com/Sharp-LQ164M1LA4A.shtml
Some guys from the sony bbs here have opened the FW48 and found the spec.
They also had opened the former models which were FW35&FW37（FW35 equipped with X-BRITE ECO and FW37 equipped with X-BRITE FULL-HD）,and
discovered that the X-BRITE ECO was a AUO Display while the X-BRITE FULL-HD was a Sharp-LQ164M1LA4A with 2 CCFL backlights, not the LED backlights.
I'm a high school student, not chosen English as major, so i'm not quite good at writing,I hope this will be a help.

 

Welcome to NBR, Gligle! How wonderful to have your input. And your English is excellent!

First of all, it's interesting that the Chinese market is receiving only FullHD pre-configured models when other markets are also sold the lesser Eco screen.

What you say (that AUO and Sharp are making Sony screens) does seem to fit in with much of what my own research is revealing.

Now that we know that at least some Eco screens are by AUO, it seems very likely that the Sony HiColor is also an AUO product especially since Sony has even used generic hardware IDs for it. given Searching "HiColor" reveals that AU Optical takes credit for developing the HiColor technology.

And it would be only natural that Sharp is making screens for Sony's FullHD since Sony and Sharp televisions used to be known decades ago as having the very same screens (Trinitron, etc.). And Sharp and Sony now co-own an HDTV screen factory in Japan.

Thanks for the confirmation that at least some of our "spec"-ulations are borne out in at least one market on direct observation.

Best wishes -- and come back soon!

 

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your post, but I have an FW140E (American / ECO) and the device manager shows SNY06FA, so obviously that screen isn't just in Europe (which is what I thought you were saying. Maybe I'm misunderstanding?)

 

Actually, I'm saying several things.

First of all, I'm saying that, unless we are comparing European screens and American screens with the same part number, we cannot be sure that the specs tests apply to all screens of a certain advertized type (e.g., Eco, FullHD, etc.). This is the first necessary but not sufficient condition.

Then I'm saying that even though the part numbers may be the same, if the screens are manufactured in different plants, there may be differences which alter performance or which involve different materials.

Screens are not precision instruments like the Hubell telescope; they're more like eyeglasses. There are specification "tolerances" and if a screen's specs fall within agreed-upon ranges ("tolerances"), it is said to be the same screen even though the differences produced on either side of the tolerance spectrum could be quite perceptible. Someone who is sensitive to astigmatic correction, for example, could receive a lens with an axis of 88 or 92 for a prescription of 90 -- 88 and 92 are both within "tolerance" -- but the visual experience is different.

You're saying that your FW140 Eco is the same screen as the FW4's Eco in Europe -- that would mean that your specs should be similar. Giigle has posted that the Eco screen on an FW3 in China was an AUO screen, not an SNY screen. On the other hand, Giigle's reporting what the part says, not what the device manager says. So, you may or may not have a screen that has the same performance (i.e., was manufactured with the same values within the "tolerance" ranges) as Giigle's.

I don't believe we've received (m)any FullHD screen numbers lately but Giigle and Phil as well report that they understand they are made by Sharp. That makes a lot of sense given the close relationship between Sony and Sharp for decades and the fact that they now own a major factory together as well. But from factory to factory of the same manufacturer, the values within "tolerance" may be different, the sources of the materials may be different, etc. Those are some of the reasons why the same number screen on different FW model refreshes might have different test results on notebookjournal.de, for example.

The EPEAT situation remains a mystery. Sony is formally committed to EPEAT and Energy Star yet it announces that only some models of the FW are compliant (unlike some other lines, like the Z where all models of the series are announced by Sony as Energy Star compliant at least).

Why would so many of the first American FW series models be EPEAT compliant and then no models at all of the FW2 or FW3 series, and then suddenly a list of pre-configured FW4s are compliant but not the FW490 series?

Either Sony is asleep at the switch and forgetting to send the models in for certification (while simulataneously announcing how it is a faithful EPEAT devotee) or some of the materials or energy performance in some of the models from some of the plants involved are not within the EPEAT and/or Energy Star "tolerances".

(My memory may betray me here, but I don't recall many FW1 owners posting how hot their machines are or how their fans are running all the time -- but I do have the impression that a number of FW3 owners have posted those complaints, for example. Those could be signs of different performances within specification "tolerance" ranges, for example.)

So, I'm betting on the latter: that there are some parts which, while they are "the same" as in the other models (same part numbers), they are "different" as well: some of the parts have materials or performances that may or may not be within the "tolerances" allowed by EPEAT and Energy Star.

But none of us on the forum actually know what is going on in all countries in the 490 model (or the FW series) because we simply do not have access to the detailed specs and "tolerances" that would be necessary to make definitive statements.

 

Yes, I agree that that part number is used in Europe and in the United States.

As for the screen in the U.S. from one FW model being from the same manufacturer, the same factory, with the same performance (that's interconnected with other computer parts, power sources, etc.), and with materials content from the same sources as the screen in a European model of the FW (from a different refresh, no less), your guess is as good as mine.

That's why Energy Star and EPEAT are done by model numbers within the computer series and not for an entire series at once. And that's why recalls on products generally involve serial numbers as well, and not just model numbers alone.

 

You're right.

 

The hardware ID of the FullHD 1080p monitor that came with the VGN-FW490CTO I received today (ordered Jul 31) is SNY07FA.

What does this mean? Did I get a good screen? Is this "the best"?

 

That is the normal Full HD panel. A very good screen.

How do you like it?

 

what do you you mean by "normal" Full HD panel?

I just got mine and I have the same screen.

 

It's the only 1080p screen I've seen Sony using on this laptop.
http://www.notebookjournal.de/tests/datasheet/notebook-review-sony-vaio-fw31zj-860

 

Well, it's not as simple as we'd hope.

Gypsydan at the AW thread in post #1123 indicates that the very same "SNY07FA" is what is used for the RGB LED on his 18.4" AW (and he even gives a screenshot of the device manager):

In case anybody is wondering if they have the Full HD RGB 3-chip LED display with Adobe colour management, there's an easy way to find out for sure! Just go into the monitor properties in the device manager and check the Hardware ID of the display. If it says SNY07FA you have the top model display.

Please post the Hardware ID's you have here, then we'll have a database of exactly what monitor is supplied with each model. See a screenshot below of how to access this information.
Attached Thumbnails

__________________
Sony VAIO VGN-AW17GU/Q - T9400 2.53 GHz, 4 GB DDR2, 640 GB (2x 320 GB 5400 rpm in RAID 0), Blu-ray writer, 9600M GT 512 MB, 18.4" RGB 3-chip LED backlit display, Vista Ultimate 32-bit.
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=297224&page=113

And then there's this Chinese site about the AW72JB model (posting 427) which also refers to the same screen ID: http://translate.google.com/transla...t=result&prev=/search?q=SNY07FA+Sony+AW&hl=en

And another Chinese forum refers to an FW48 with that same SNY07FA screen, states that FW screens are posssibly made in China, are by Sharp (or by AUO for "low-end" FWs), and ALSO presents a fascinating ad and graphic ( http://benyouhuifile.it168.com/atta...e1de8928777e63b0e97wBPQHDk0IUny.jpg/p/FW4.jpg) which states that the FW48 there gets 100% NTSC and is "Clear Bright" and "Rich Color" (probably HiColor from its resemblance to the AUO HiColor site graphics: http://auo.com/auoDEV/technology.php?sec=HiColor ).

Here's the link to that Chinese forum thread for the discussion:
http://translate.google.com/transla...t=result&prev=/search?q=SNY07FA+Sony+AW&hl=en

Thus, since it is used for more than one model and screen size and backlight type (CCFL and LED), it would seem that SNY07FA, like MS_0000, is a generic Sony screen indicator.

So, the search for the "Naked Truth" about Sony screens in specific countries continues....:GEEK:

 

my FW490 CTO (FW490J) monitor ID is also SNY07FA.

 

SNY07FA in the FW is the Full HD panel, SNY06FA is the ECO panel. Sometimes things are really simple.

SNY06FA, ECO 1600*900 screen:
durchschnittl. Luminanz cd/m² 181,00
Schwarzwert bei 100 cd/m2 cd/m² 0,72
Schwarzwert bei maximaler Helligkeit cd/m² 1,35
Kontrast bei 100 cd/m2 :1 138,00
Kontrast bei maximaler Helligkeit :1 134,00

SNY07FA, Double lamp 1920*1080 screen:
durchschnittl. Luminanz cd/m² 274,00
Schwarzwert bei 100 cd/m2 cd/m² 0,22
Schwarzwert bei maximaler Helligkeit cd/m² 0,61
Kontrast bei 100 cd/m2 :1 454,00
Kontrast bei maximaler Helligkeit :1 449,00

 

Yes, simple indeed -- if you're not bothered by the fact that the exact same part number is used for CCFL and RGB LED screens, for 16.4" and 18.4" screens, and perhaps more....

Simple indeed, if all the part number in the device manager refers to is the resolution of the screen.

Right. Got it! The SNY07FA is a 1080p screen.

Anything else you want to know (like HiColor or CCFL double lamp vs RGB LED, for instance), well, you can't know it from that part number. You might guess it from what others have observed by the use of that part number in certain contexts (like in an FW of a certain model or an AW of a specific model) in one country or another -- but you can't know it for "sure" for your own model unless you have the exact same model that the specs of notebookjournal.de, etc. were being tested on.

You can, however, hold a company to the details of its bill of sale contract (but not its advertizing if there's a disclaimer in the terms and conditions on it releasing the company from liability for typos).

This is why Sony (famous, BTW, for its published, superb television screen specs), does NOT publish many screen specs as standard for any of its laptop series letters in its advertizing. And why it might, nevertheless, mean something when ads for a series refresh suddenly say "100% NTSC".

Nonetheless, we are making progress in deciphering Sony cryptology!