Dell Inspiron 9300 Review - Page 4

Have you ever taken a picture that turned out a little too dark or too bright from what the actual scene was? Or maybe you remember taking a picture where there were very light areas right next to dark areas, like a person standing in the shadow of a tree on a nice bright, sunny day? Ever notice how it seemed like either the dark areas were too dark to make out many details or the bright areas were just a little too bright or over-exposed? If you took that picture and say loaded it into Photoshop, you could probably brighten the whole picture so you could see more details in the shadow areas, but that would totally wash out any details in the brighter areas like the sky and make it look totally white. Or you could tone down the brightness and make the bright areas like the sky look like a more natural blue, but now the darker areas are just way too dark to make out! No matter how you adjust the brightness of the entire picture, you can't make all the details in the dark areas stand out AND have all the details in the bright areas look properly exposed at the same time, unless you had the skill in Photoshop to specifically lighten up only the dark areas and darken only the light areas.

My point to all this is that cameras (and monitors) are quite limited in the dynamic range that they can capture (or show) compared to your own eyes. Depending on how you have captured the scene with your camera, you may have properly exposed for the darker areas to capture more detail and contrast in those areas, while "washing out" the brighter areas. In reality, those brighter areas can contain wonderful color and contrast that you can see with your own eyes but just don't see in the picture because of the limited dynamic range that can be captured by the camera. On the other hand, you can set your camera to properly expose for the lighter areas, but now you lose some detail and contrast in the darker areas.

I bet that all one has to do to make the pictures of the Sony display look better than the Dell's is to meter (or set the exposure level) for the brighter areas, and then most people will be thinking "Wow, that Dell looks so dark, you can hardly make out any of the details, while the Sony looks so much more vibrant and rich with colors". The fact is a lot of people are quick to judge based on what they see in pictures, and they base their decisions on these impressions without digging deeper, as evidenced by many of the comments made since those pictures were posted.

Bottom line - there's no way to really tell which screen truly has better contrast or deeper, richer colors from pictures alone -- you need to see the actual screens with your own eyes in an environment where you would normally use it.

Also, viewing angles will affect perceived LCD image quality, differing where the camera lens is and its orientation to the two screens.

Hiya, am a noob, what is the difference in the RAM? Is Dell's stock Ram not up to par? I'll be customising it with Dell online with 2 x 512 DDR2 PC3200.... Would it be advised to get minimal RAM from Dell, and then buy the RAM elsewhere?

Finally, does this "sparkly" business affect WXGA+ more or less than the WUXGA screens?

Thx

Screen comparison

That's actually not entirely true. You cannot get the true colors or constrast through a picture taken by a camera and viewed on another monitor, BUT, you can compare the RELATIVE colors and contrast. Granted they aren't the true, real-life colors, but if the Dell has richer contrast than the Sony, that's possible to see. Same with the brightness. If the picture is taken well, both laptops will suffer the same effects of the camera; hence a relative comparison is possible. Then, all you have to do is run down to your local Best Buy / Circuit City / etc and look at a Sony XBrite. Ta Da!

I agree you can tell relative brightness, but can you REALLY tell relative contrast?

I have taken two of the original images, loaded them into Photoshop Elements and simply decreased the brightness on both pics to -100. Which screen can you see more detail or contrast from now?

Well the dell has almost blacked out on the right, and the Sony screen shows its potential with that extra brightness. But would you need that much brightness?? I mean it would kill your eyes. And if you look in the centre of the Sony screen it' still looks washed out slightly. I have seen in a review http://www.laptoplogic.com/news/03/11/2005/136/0/ showing the Sony having better brightness but lacking in colours. But as been said can you compare picture quality from a photo? No. From my experience when I saw the screen quality of the Sony FS series in person I was shocked how good the colours and brightness were.

review stated no gigabit

which is funny considering its on the D810 and M70

guess its an consumer versus enterprise thing for now

maybe offered in future if demand is there

Help: Which Screen to get with following config?

Dudes and Dudesses:

Please advise should I get the Dell 9300 with the WUXGA screen or the WXGA

Spec:

1 Gig Ram
60G 7200rpm
2G 760 CPU
PCIE 256 VId Card
9 Cell x 2
Which Screen?? WXGA or WUXGA

I am confused by the original issues with the 9200 *sparkles*

I was advised that this 9300 screen is Samsung whweas the 9200 was LG

My usage: games , business, music production

It would be great to know if the XGA is the 9200 screen or not

1. Who has the 9300 WUXGA what is it like?

Appreciate all comments

Cheers

reflection with tru-life

Well I got my 9300 in yesterday and I called for my return authorization this afternoon....I do really like it, it's a cool notebook...and if I was a big gamer I guess I would keep it... truthfully I did not like the reflection...and I had been looking at those screens in Office Depot etc on the Sonys , Hp's etc for months hoping Dell would come out with one......but when I was using my new 9300 all I could see was myself...like a mirror...when I played a dvd it was beautiful...but I don't like looking at myself in a real mirror...sure don't want to do it while on the computer....I wonder if it's not as bad with a smaller screen but this was just too much for me...I am going back to the dell site to try again....maybe I didnt' give myself a chance to get used to it but I decided I'd spent too much money on this to just wait and see if I would adjust...

Anyway, this is just me.....I have to say I've been wanting one of these screens for so long...and now I know...it's interesting to see everyones opinions....

oh, and for what it's worth..I didn't noticed a "sparkle" or whatever has been discussed...just the reflection...one of the pictures someone took in Best Buy and posted in this thread somewhere is typical of what I mean...the photographer and what was behind him was clearly visible....

Good luck to all with theirs....

BNells (dudess I guess )

Thanks bnells

what was your spec?

I am not a big tech type person...these are the highlights I guess....I decided this was just too much for me...I have an Inspiron 8200 now and it's been great...just wanted something newer and flashier...but not the 9300 I think


Inspiron 9300,Pentium M 750
17 inch True Life Wide Screen UXGA
1GB, DDR2, 533MHz 2 Dimm, for Inspiron 9300 256MB NVIDIA 6800
60GB Ultra ATA 7200RPM Hard Drive
Integrated 10/100 Network Card and Modem
8X DVD+/-RW Drive
Intel PRO/Wireless 2915 Internal Wireless

..................

Opinion is key

benlls has a VERY good point. These screens are different (ie glossy) from "normal" LCDs. If you haven't seen a glossy screen and then get one, you're in for a big surprise, could be good or bad. People hating their screens could be purely because they don't like the gloss. I personally saw the glossy screens and thought they were amazing!

The point is, one screen might be amazing to one person, and that exact screen could be crap to someone else.

The reason for glossy screens ...

It's a pitty you don't like the glossy screen ... it's one of those things you either love or hate.

There is actually some logic to having a mirror-smooth finish on an LCD ... the question comes down to what is worse - light from any angle being scattered into your eyes (as is the case with the usual textured screen) or potentially seeing reflections in the surface (as is the case with a glossy screen)? I actually converted one of my old laptop screens to a glossy screen (3M sell a special film, about 0.7mm thick that you apply to normal screens to turn them glossy) ... in my opinion the improvement, not only in contrast but sharpness was profound. A big part of that is because, on a normal screen, the light you see from a pixel doesn't just come from that pixel, but it includes light from neighbouring pixels that have scattered off the textured coating over that pixel, plus ambient light scattered off the textured coating (and because this light can be coming from almost anywhere in the hemisphere around the screen it's impossible to aim away from). When the glossy film was applied, the adhesive filled in the textured surface so all the light you got from that pixel was actually what the screen was giving out for that pixel added to whatever ambient light was at exactly the right angle to reflect back to you (even that was reduced because of the anti-reflective interference film on the top layer of the glossy surface). The screen went from unreadable in bright sunlight to reasonably readable, which is quite a feat for an 8 year old laptop! The disadvantage though is you need to aim the screen away from light sources otherwise you can get very clear reflections (especially if the screen is very dark).

Well, my 9200 is sold and the 9300 arrived today. Essentially the same specs as the original reviewer in this thread except 9-cell on the battery.
Initial thoughts about the screen are the text is much clearer than the 9200. The screen and colors are very crisp, very pretty to look at. There is almost no reflection at all except on a black screen (bootup). Even the forums screen on this website (very dark) reveal little or no reflection.
Bottom line is that reflection is a non-issue. As for the "sparkle effect", I had the wxga+ version of the i9200 which had significantly less sparkle effect complaints compared to the i9200 wuxga.
The sparle effect comparison between the 9200 wxga/9300wuxga screens is essentially equivalent. I would prefer no anti-glare coating at all, but it is only a minor issue with this screen. Overall I would give the 9200 screen a 6/10; I would give the 9300 screen a 8/10.

Big improvement Dell!

Hi,

did you originall have the XGA screen or the WUXGA screen - what do you have now?

Former computer (i9200) had xga+. New computer (i9300) has the uxga.

about the glossy screens...I have wanted one for months now...since I first saw one in Office Depot or somewhere like that...and I was excited to get my 9300...just in real life, for me, it turns out it wasn't what I wanted after all...I agree it's beautiful....and I really really wanted to love it...but I guess as the guy on a tv commercial says "I fear change"...maybe next time I will go for it and really give it a chance...probably for me was overall I decided the 9300 was too big for me and I'd spent too much money..haven't decided what to go for next but something smaller, maybe cheaper, ( the verdict is still out on that )...I will keep reading here to see if I am making a huge mistake sending it back so now I'm thinking about the 6000.... maybe...don't know....I also "fear" changing from Dell...never had any other and have had no problems from any I've owned so far....

bnells

Thanks for the great info in this and other 9300 threads guys... I had been looking at the HPZD80000 line for a while and was ready to make my purchase until found this site. After a couple days of reading reviews for both the HP and Dell laptops, I decided on the Dell 9300, got a better equiped laptop and saved a couple hundred bucks in the process. I was really impressed with the level of detailed knowledge you have all provided. The reviews in the Dell posts are MCUH more thorough and objective than the reviews and information in the HP posts, and this had almost as much bearing on my purchase as did the $750 off coupon.


Coming soon... my Inspiron 9300 1.73Ghz
17" UXGA disply w/TrueLife
512MB DDR2 SDRAM
256 mb NVIDIA GeForce Go 6800
60GB 7200rpm hard drive
Winblows XP
blah blah blah
set to ship March 31st.....

well, I unpacked the 9300 to give the glossy screen another try and I have to say it's not as "bad" as I thought at first...in fact I put a dvd in the 9300 and in my 8200...side by side there was no comparison , the picture is amazing on the 9300....still overall the computer is just bigger than what I want...but having read the posts here I wanted to take another look...am still sending it back but will not rule out the glossy screen in the future...maybe Dell will start to use it on other notebooks..other than 9300 and 700m...( aren't those the only two?)
Still confused about the "sparkles" ...I guess I didn't notice that since I have no idea what it looks like...or maybe the one I got doesn't have them?

bnells

hmmm, this thread is starting to make me doubt what I thought was a pretty great screen. I deffinately haven't noticed any sparkle. And the greasiness people describe sounds like a bad choice in resolution. The colors do seem a bit dark, but I think the brightness might be down a bit too much by default.