Quote from: Picky Ricky on July 22, 2019, 20:23:55
I believe the calculation for touch latency has an error. The article quotes "49 ms touch latency" which I believe should corrected to read 4.9 ms.

There are 1000 milliseconds to one second. Thus, a screen polling rate of 240 hz would imply 4.2 ms of latency (1000/240= 4.16).

Latency and polling rate are 2 different metrics. it is sort of the same thing with the new 240Hz Sharp IGZO laptop displays. it refreshes the screen every 4.16ms but its response time is approximately triple that, causing some level of ghosting. polling rate only refers to how many times a second a signal is sent and does not take delay into consideration. response time is how long it would take from taking an input, process it, and spit out the signal corresponding to said input that gets sent out.

Quote from: Picky Ricky on July 22, 2019, 20:23:55
I believe the calculation for touch latency has an error. The article quotes "49 ms touch latency" which I believe should corrected to read 4.9 ms.

There are 1000 milliseconds to one second. Thus, a screen polling rate of 240 hz would imply 4.2 ms of latency (1000/240= 4.16).

Thanks for bringing that up. However, ROG states 49 ms in its promotional slide, a screenshot of which we have included, so perhaps it has it wrong?

I believe the calculation for touch latency has an error. The article quotes "49 ms touch latency" which I believe should corrected to read 4.9 ms.

There are 1000 milliseconds to one second. Thus, a screen polling rate of 240 hz would imply 4.2 ms of latency (1000/240= 4.16).

If only this vented through the top or bottom I could get a case to cover up the ugly back and get a generally satisfactory phone! The only major issue left would be lack of a stylus but in that sense there would be no substitute for the Note. Just want to vote with my wallet regarding the removal of the headphone jack.