Quick Look–What’s in a display?

Quick Look–What’s in a display?

  • Comments 3
  • Likes

Today’s quick look features Stevie Bathiche describing the improvements to the display in Surface 2 and Surface Pro 2. The display on the new devices is gorgeous, and the engineering work to produce gorgeousness isn’t trivial. It requires focus on far more than pixel count – things like size and aspect ratio, optical bonding of the display to the cover glass for reduced reflection, contrast ratio, viewing angles, color depth, gray scale, color reproduction, luminance, and backlight uniformity.

Both Surface 2 and Surface Pro 2 feature 10.6” ClearType HD displays with a 16:9 aspect ratio (the most popular for TVs – the screen a lot of HD content is designed for) that offer up stunning 1080p video and awesome gaming, as well as crisp text.

With the proliferation of screens in our lives it’s easy to take them for granted and to forget the huge strides made in the technology in just the last few years. Take a moment to remember the quality of the first photo you looked at on a computer or mobile phone, then get to a Microsoft Store or other retailer and check out the display on the new Surface devices. They’re brilliant.

Dan Laycock

Senior Manager – Microsoft Surface

You must be logged in to comment. Sign in or Join Now
  • observer
    6 Posts

    I used to think that Surface (Windows RT) was useless until I saw this video:


    It's mind blowing and I'm going to buy a Surface 2 to replace my iPad once it's available in my country.

    I'm not a computer geek, but I have a huge interest in gadgets. I bet almost everybody never knew Surface could do such useful things (wireless projecting to TV, voice recognition, plug-in Xbox controller, account for kids, etc).

    This fact tells you that there's something wrong with the way you, Microsoft, get the message across the average people like me. I look forward to get this device, and please, don't kill the desktop environment in Surface --that's what sets it apart.

  • arrow22
    3 Posts

    I had a Surface Pro 2 for a week before returning it. I found that while there's a lot to love about it, the trackpad performance on either cover is unacceptable, the stylus is not accurate enough to replace a mouse, particularly near the edges of the screen, and the 16:9 aspect ratio doesn't fit any at all content when in portrait, and hardly fits any content in landscape, other than movies.

    Websites, software, apps, photographs, none of these work well in 16:9 format. Toolbars are almost universally at the top, and the narrow aspect ratio used on the SP2 just reduces the work area height, similar to how cheap netbooks did. It's a decision that's been ridiculed over and over in product reviews, and having used the tablet extensively, I have to agree that it's simply not a great format for tablets. I hope this year is the last 16:9 Surface tablets we ever see.


    Buy a surface mouse, maybe that might help,

    Buy a thinner stylus, $20 for surface

    I agree that 16:9 is not the best for text but is good for video. Also, people have been wanting a smaller version of surface.

  • chriswong
    6 Posts

    Personally, I'm still having issues adjusting to 1080 resolution on a 10 inch display with my Surface Pro 1.  Had settled into using 1600x900 res with 100% DPI scaling with Win 8.0, and using 1920x1080 on larger external monitors also with 100% DPI scaling.  Since my 8.1 upgrade, been trying to use 1080 again with the auto adjusting DPI, and for the most part, it's a better experience.  I use RDP heavily as an IT pro, and connecting to so many servers that use 100% by default is difficult to work with, so this makes me want to switch back to 1600x900 / 100%.  Another reason to switch to 1600x900 / 100%, even testing with using 125% scaling in RDP sessions using the Metro Remote Desktop client to Win 2008 R2 servers introduces a quirky touch calibration issue, where long presses are in the incorrect location.  I basically cannot use a touch-initiated right-click.  This issue does not exist in the old desktop Remote Desktop client, long press locations are accurate.