Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hardware Review: Inelmatic XF700 Industrial Sunlight Readable Touch Screen Monitor

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hardware Review: Inelmatic XF700 Industrial Sunlight Readable Touch Screen Monitor

    What is it?

    The Inelmatic XF700 is a 7” 16:9 high-brightness touch-screen monitor. This monitor has multiple output options, transflective technologies, and a unique and optimized form-factor.

    The Verdict:


    The Inelmatic XF700 is a well thought-out piece of automotive computing hardware. From the screen to the shell you can tell Inelmatic designed it for Car PC use. If it can survive the name-recognition of competing devices, I truly believe there is a new “best of class” in the 7” touch-screen market.

    See this product on the mp3Car Store here.

    What’s in the box?


    The XF700 comes with an instruction manual, VESA mount, an attachable stylus pointer, and a unique single-loom wire which includes connectors for power, USB, VGA input, composite input, S-Video input, rear camera input, and a current-sensing auto-switch wire.

    Description:


    The XF700 is the latest of the high-brightness touch-friendly monitors to hit the mobile computer scene. Upon opening the box and getting the monitor in my hands, I immediately noticed how solid the monitor feels. This indicates to me that the build quality should be stellar and that the XF700 could potentially be built to withstand the harsh automotive environments. Another improvement that immediately stood out is the single-wire design. There is only a single wire protruding from the back of the XF700. The wire is flexible, and sticks out of the rear of the unit, allowing for greater installation flexibility than most competitors offer. This wire then latches securely to its counterpart, which allows an array of connection methods. The XF700 offers VGA inputs, 2 sets of composite video inputs, 1 set of audio inputs, a separate rear camera input, and for even greater flexibility the manufacturer has included a single wire current-sensing switch wire. In fact, the only connection method that seems to be missing is DVI. Powering the device is more flexible than its competition as well, as the XF700 allows any power source from 9-30VDC. This removes the requirement of a stable 12v source.



    Of course, the most important feature of any touch-screen monitor is what’s on the screen, and XF700 shines through in this regard. The touch-screen is transflective and appears to shy away dust and fingerprints better than competing units. Installation of the touch-screen is plug-and-play, and the software which controls the touch-screen is the same as the Lilliput and Xenarc units. The high-brightness of the LCD provides a crisp and beautiful display even in direct sunlight. The 629 Lilliput in my car couldn’t come close to matching the brightness and image quality of the XF700.


    Even my “sunlight readable” Acer laptop doesn’t match the quality of the XF700 in the brightest conditions.


    The native resolution of the XF700 is 800x480, however it seems to handle 800x600 and even 1024x768 without much hassle. The display quality is the best I’ve seen to date within the 7” monitor market.


    The XF700 has several buttons on the front, which at first detract from the beauty of its design. However, I find the buttons work better in the car than those of the Lilliput and Xernarc devices. They sit flush on the frame of the monitor, and provide a very tactile “click” each time a button is pressed. The buttons do things like power the display, toggle the built-in 3-step gamma, and open up the on-screen menu. This menu allows far more customization than competing units.

    The Positive:


    • High-quality beautiful display even in direct sunlight
    • Installation-friendly wiring
    • Built-in rear camera support, with multiple auto-switch options
    • Easy to use 3 stage gamma
    • 500:1 contrast ratio
    • Native resolution of 800x480 • Auto-power on when VGA signal is detected
    • Flexible wiring options
    • Shock and vibration resistant for reliable car installations

    The Negative:


    • No DVI input
    • Still has the bright blue “No VGA” screen at upon powering the device
    • No remote control?

    The Verdict:


    The Inelmatic XF700 is a well thought-out piece of automotive computing hardware. From the screen to the shell you can tell Inelmatic designed it for Car PC use. If it can survive the name-recognition of competing devices, I truly believe there is a new “best of class” in the 7” touch-screen market.

    Specifications:

    Aspect Ratio: 16:9 Colors: 256k Native Resolution: 800x480px VGA Modes: 640x480 to 1024x768 Contrast: 500:1 Inputs: VGA, 2 x Composite Video Optional Audio: 2 x 1W (stereo) Touch Panel: Resistive 4 wires. Endurance >2M Touch. Optional 5 wires Power Supply: 9-30VDC automotive car/truck suitable Power Consumption: 6W Dimensions: 183x125x31mm Dimensions (screen): 152x94mm Enclosure: Aluminum chassis/rear. PVC-ABS front Operation Temperature: -20°C to 70°C Max (-10°C to 60°C continuous) Vibrations: 1G 2-500Hz Shock: 20G 11ms Drop: 10cm Max

    See this product on the mp3Car Store here.
    mp3Car.com Senior Tech Blogger (Want a product reviewed? Contact me.)
    Follow Me on Twitter or Facebook
    Live mp3Car Facebook Chat

  • #2
    Thanks for the review. It's nice and exciting to see a new monitor such as this hit the carpc market. Very pricey in the store, but I think I would shell out extra and take this over the Lilliput transflective.

    Comment


    • #3
      it really is built better i mean that was the very first thing i noticed. Very Very solid
      mp3Car.com Senior Tech Blogger (Want a product reviewed? Contact me.)
      Follow Me on Twitter or Facebook
      Live mp3Car Facebook Chat

      Comment


      • #4
        The one problem I see is the glare. I'm guessing that means the touchscreen is not optically bonded.

        For $949 it should be.

        IMO this makes the Mo-Co-So a much better deal still. The Mo-Co-So is optically bonded , transflective, has AG and is $350 cheaper.
        My 2007 Yukon XL setup. http://www.mp3car.com/vbulletin/show...64-5000-a.html

        Comment


        • #5
          So those buttons on the front are capacitive?
          Fusion Brain Version 6 Released!
          1.9in x 2.9in -- 47mm x 73mm
          30 Digital Outputs -- Directly drive a relay
          15 Analogue Inputs -- Read sensors like temperature, light, distance, acceleration, and more
          Buy now in the MP3Car.com Store

          Comment


          • #6
            no.. they click. They just appear flush mounted
            mp3Car.com Senior Tech Blogger (Want a product reviewed? Contact me.)
            Follow Me on Twitter or Facebook
            Live mp3Car Facebook Chat

            Comment


            • #7
              I've had some discussion with someone from the company who manufactures the XF700 in regards to whether or not its optically bonded. Here is some of the information that need be clarified.

              This monitor is optically bonded, plus it's re-workable, it means, if the touch fails, can be replaced.

              It's not possible to avoid the glare 100%, but it can be reduced. Using AG coating is one way, but it makes the real contrast very low under strong light. If you compare Mo-Co-So to this monitor side by side, you would see the difference. Mo-Co-So will turn all like purple, while this new one keeps readable in the same light conditions.

              Glare VS AG can be discussed, depending of the application, AG or Glare is better choice.
              For example, avionics and high grade applications are using always Glare finish, AG isn't allowed because of the real contrast issue.
              Generally, glare is becoming more popular the last years, because the dark keeps dark, the effect is like a better color depth, not washed out.

              There is something is weird in Mo-Co-So monitors, if you have a transflective monitor with AG finish, the transflective effect is no longer useful, the diffuse reflection of the AG layer is higher than the reflected image brightness, so it's useless. I think transflective has became a commercial word to easy sell better quality monitors, but many are not really transflective.

              Besides, Mo-Co-So uses lilliput as base to enhance (chassis, electronics...), it's different level, plus the XF700 panel is over 600nits brightness at very low power consumption.
              mp3Car.com Senior Tech Blogger (Want a product reviewed? Contact me.)
              Follow Me on Twitter or Facebook
              Live mp3Car Facebook Chat

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Sonicxtacy02 View Post
                I've had some discussion with someone from the company who manufactures the XF700 in regards to whether or not its optically bonded. Here is some of the information that need be clarified.
                That is a fancy way of saying "Yes our monitor has more glare but it's better, believe us"

                Yes the Mo-Co-So looks "purple". When it's off and facing the sun, not when it's on.

                I would gladly trade "slightly" less deep blacks (which I don't think they are ) for being able to see the image on the screen and not the person or objects sitting next to me because of the glare.

                Plus he is lying about Avionics always using glare and not AG. The majority of screens I have seen have had AG on them.
                My 2007 Yukon XL setup. http://www.mp3car.com/vbulletin/show...64-5000-a.html

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by hailrazer View Post
                  That is a fancy way of saying "Yes our monitor has more glare but it's better, believe us"
                  The text it's not saying that it has more glare, it says glare finish, maybe the right word is glossy, it means specular reflection type, not diffuse reflection like AG finish. AG layer is just a very irregular surface, designed to spread the light beam in smaller beams in several directions. Sunlight readable monitors with glare finish doesn't spread the light, it uses different technology to avoid the ambient light to disturb the viewer.

                  Originally posted by hailrazer View Post
                  Yes the Mo-Co-So looks "purple". When it's off and facing the sun, not when it's on.

                  I would gladly trade "slightly" less deep blacks (which I don't think they are ) for being able to see the image on the screen and not the person or objects sitting next to me because of the glare.
                  You are trading contrast, it shows you know nothing about optics.
                  Please show us pictures with the monitor facing the sun and powered on. You can use a pattern with white/black bars, then we will see what's white and what's black.
                  I checked mo-co-so website and measure two of their pictures, it showed less than 2:1 contrast , no readable at all, and it's using their photos, surely favorable for their products.

                  Why you think a sunlight readable monitor like XF700 will show the person or objects next? Maybe you haven't seen a real sunlight readable monitor working for real before. If the light over those objects is so strong that makes a visible reflection in a sunlight readable monitor, it will also show in mo-co-so monitor, but instead clear reflection it will make a diffuse reflection loosing the contrast over the whole image.

                  Originally posted by hailrazer View Post
                  Plus he is lying about Avionics always using glare and not AG. The majority of screens I have seen have had AG on them.
                  Please you get informed before say who is lying, Avionics means the cockpit, almost military grade monitors, not the cheap monitors for the passenger entertainment that you have seen... those ones use AG and even recycled TFT panels.

                  Don't get me wrong, the type of finish like mo-co-so uses is useful in some cases, but not sunlight readable at all.

                  Now you can try to guess why the other transflective model in mp3car store is also glare finish.
                  There isn't any monitor under 1200nits with AG finish that can be fully sunlight readable, it can reach daylight readable, but it's different to be sunlight readable to daylight only. Btw, how bright are mo-co-so screens? This XF700 is 600nits plus transflective.

                  I think you haven't tried mo-co-so screen in real high ambient light application. Outdoor applications like marine, where the strong light is coming from several angles, AG (diffuse finish) will reduce dramatically the contrast, making the image unreadable.

                  You can try to play a bit with the optics, you will enjoy learning. If you use glasses, put the fingers over one of the glasses until you make it all dirty, you just got a DIY AG coating. Then face them to a light source like the sun or a lamp. Now try to look thru them, and tell us which one you can see better.

                  Nowadays, there are some nano-size AG coatings, but even so small they are still reducing the contrast, and worse, it also spread the image beam coming from the TFT, losing picture definition, so the glare finish is better for high grade monitors. Don't tell me the one in your home uses AG, high grade doesn't mean U$800 TV.

                  Not eveything is good about glare finish, in touch monitors, the glare finish has a problem, it's the fingerprints. To avoid the dirty to get stick and in the same time easier to be cleaned, there are some kind of anti-fingerprint layer added to the good glare monitors.
                  Keep clean a sunlight readable monitor is important, the fingerprints will become like an AG layer, spreading the light and losing readability.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    LOL at that entire posts.

                    Look I have no doubt you monitor is a high quality monitor worth a lot of money. And I bet the picture is terrific.

                    But the simple fact is the pics in the first post show the truth. A lot of glare that is unacceptable. The Mo-Co-So has none of that glare. You can't see the reflection of everything around you with the Mo-Co-So.

                    Originally posted by Samse View Post
                    Why you think a sunlight readable monitor like XF700 will show the person or objects next?
                    Why do I think that? Simple , look at the pic. You can clearly see the hand holding the camera. This is a mirror like reflection. It is typical of a non optically bonded touchscreen with no AG.



                    Sunlight readable is fine, glare is not acceptable. I will gladly trade the slight contrast loss of AG for no glare.

                    See this is a car environment. Having a sunlight readable monitor means nothing if all you will see is the woman sitting in the passenger seat with her bright blonde hair. You need to have no reflection when the sun is shining in the car through the front and side windows. That is when you get reflection and glare with a non optically bonded non AG coated touchscreen.

                    You can tell me all you want that your screen doesn't do this but the pics don't lie.



                    And I have 4 HD T.V's in my house that costs over $2000 each and they ALL have AG. And the screen in my Yukon is an Avionics screen and guess what...yep AG.

                    I'm sure your monitor is great, I just don't want glare and reflection. That's all.


                    Originally posted by Samse View Post
                    Don't get me wrong, the type of finish like mo-co-so uses is useful in some cases, but not sunlight readable at all.
                    Please, maybe you haven't used a Mo-Co-So ? It is VERY sunlight readable, more so than most that claim it.
                    My 2007 Yukon XL setup. http://www.mp3car.com/vbulletin/show...64-5000-a.html

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by hailrazer View Post
                      LOL at that entire posts.

                      Look I have no doubt you monitor is a high quality monitor worth a lot of money. And I bet the picture is terrific.

                      But the simple fact is the pics in the first post show the truth. A lot of glare that is unacceptable. The Mo-Co-So has none of that glare. You can't see the reflection of everything around you with the Mo-Co-So.

                      Why do I think that? Simple , look at the pic. You can clearly see the hand holding the camera. This is a mirror like reflection. It is typical of a non optically bonded touchscreen with no AG.

                      Sunlight readable is fine, glare is not acceptable. I will gladly trade the slight contrast loss of AG for no glare.

                      See this is a car environment. Having a sunlight readable monitor means nothing if all you will see is the woman sitting in the passenger seat with her bright blonde hair. You need to have no reflection when the sun is shining in the car through the front and side windows. That is when you get reflection and glare with a non optically bonded non AG coated touchscreen.

                      You can tell me all you want that your screen doesn't do this but the pics don't lie.

                      And I have 4 HD T.V's in my house that costs over $2000 each and they ALL have AG. And the screen in my Yukon is an Avionics screen and guess what...yep AG.

                      I'm sure your monitor is great, I just don't want glare and reflection. That's all.

                      Please, maybe you haven't used a Mo-Co-So ? It is VERY sunlight readable, more so than most that claim it.
                      Look hailrazer, i might not be able to change your opinion even showing you from the basic optics, i see you are happy married to your mo-co-so monitor, congratulations, although you are still checking other sunlight carefully, i wonder if you are really so happy with your current screen. Anyway, bring it to a boat, a truck with big windows, a bus or helicopter, you will surprise.

                      What i'm trying to explain you is the concept of AG and why it's not used in professional sunlight readable applications.
                      The irregular surface of the AG layer will make any light, coming from any angle, decreases the real contrast of the monitor, making it less readable.

                      Let's analyze the picture you classify as "bad":


                      The two arrows show the same point in both normal lilliput monitor and the XF700. There is a small reflection on the XF700 because the hand is really bright, exposed directly to the sun light and just in the angle to reflect. Even so, it's still perfectly readable. You can also check the rest of the screen with direct sunlight over it, it doesn't shows any change, keeping the depth and color saturation, that's the difference to mo-co-so monitor.
                      I bet, mo-co-so monitor in exactly the same light conditions will show very bad, the light coming from the up-right corner will reflect on the AG and the AG will spread it over the screen, resulting a washed out image, low quality and unreadable. It's due to the haze of the AG layer, depending of the AG pattern, it can be more or less haze.


                      An example photo, it's with less light, just a 24W lamp (not even close to the sunlight on the XF700 photo), reflecting over an AG monitor optically bonded, very similar (if not the same) to the mo-co-so.



                      The pictures on mo-co-so website shows this effect as well, it looks washed out, not color depth and barely readable at the right-left corner. It shows the AG effect, reducing dramatically the real contrast. And it's a picture taken by themselves, so it's not objective, the XF700 pic is taken by a forum's user.


                      About your 4 HD T.V's in your house that costs over $2000, how old are them? Have you tried to watch it with a sunny window near to the TV? I have an LG purchased two years ago at about $2000 and i get mad every afternoon when the sun comes inside...
                      Do you think are they sunlight readable? I don't think so, it's a commercial TV.

                      As you may know and understand, high tech application is first used in aerospace, military.. after some years comes to the commercial market. You will see how the tendency of high definition TV is glare finish for the next years, or in case very slight AG mixed with other treatments.
                      An example, any cockpit monitor uses strengthened glass, which is glare finish, of course it has a layer to manage the reflection, but it's not AG at all.

                      I insist, i'm not telling that AG isn't useful in certain cases, but not direct sunlight.

                      Last, the monitor market target is professional applications, where reliability is needed and a lilliput may take few months to fail, it's also an important matter for the price.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        You just don't seem to be understanding. The majority if time you are in a car the sunlight shines in and illuminates the interior of the car. With a non optically bonded non AG screen got get a ton of reflection. Ask everyone here they'll say the same thing. With the monitor reviewed above you will have ha lot of reflection period, the pic proves that. That is not acceptable to me or many others.

                        And no I am not married to my monitor. If the one reviewed was better at handling reflection I would buy it in a heartbeat, but the level of reflect tion it has makes itunsuitable for me.

                        I have laptops with glare surfaces and I can't use them outside or near a window because of the reflection. But my laptop with AG is easy to use in the same situation. And my TVs with AG look great in sunlight but my 42" downstairs with glare is terrible.

                        Put AG on that screen and optically bond the touchscreen and I would buy it.
                        My 2007 Yukon XL setup. http://www.mp3car.com/vbulletin/show...64-5000-a.html

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I think what hailrazer is trying to say, is that more color washing is an acceptable compromise for less glare. Glare is enough of an issue in the car, that many of us are willing to take wash out because while it doesn't look as good, it's still very readable whereas if you have a shiny reflection in the screen, the screen will be quite unreadable.

                          I'm sure in direct light situations (rather than reflected) this screen would be much easier readable than an AG screen, which is help for for people with convertibles to be sure.
                          "stop with the REINSTALLS, what do you think we got some lame-o installer!!!" - mitchjs
                          RevFE
                          My Shop

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            That's exactly my point.

                            Also another point. I work in the automobile industry fixing dents in cars . And in ALL the highline automobiles with touchscreen, navigation systems they have AG. EVERYONE of them. Why? Glare is bad in a car environment. This is in Mercedes,Lexus,BMW,etc. I think if a glare screen was better it would be used.
                            My 2007 Yukon XL setup. http://www.mp3car.com/vbulletin/show...64-5000-a.html

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by malcom2073 View Post
                              I think what hailrazer is trying to say, is that more color washing is an acceptable compromise for less glare. Glare is enough of an issue in the car, that many of us are willing to take wash out because while it doesn't look as good, it's still very readable whereas if you have a shiny reflection in the screen, the screen will be quite unreadable.

                              I'm sure in direct light situations (rather than reflected) this screen would be much easier readable than an AG screen, which is help for for people with convertibles to be sure.
                              Ya, i get it, good explanation, but remember that color wash and low contrast it become just not readable. With AG you don't recognize any reflected shape on the screen, it just become a part of the image, so your eyes will never be able to see the image.
                              In a sunlight readable monitor with glare finish, you can see a slight reflection but it's just a background compared to the image picture, you still can see perfectly the image.

                              Originally posted by hailrazer View Post
                              That's exactly my point.

                              Also another point. I work in the automobile industry fixing dents in cars . And in ALL the highline automobiles with touchscreen, navigation systems they have AG. EVERYONE of them. Why? Glare is bad in a car environment. This is in Mercedes,Lexus,BMW,etc. I think if a glare screen was better it would be used.
                              I understand your point. You like more AG because the reflection is diffuse, you don't really see the object reflected on the screen, but don't tell that there isn't reflection, the reflection is just spreaded over the screen.

                              The only i can say, the picture you are looking isn't that bad, the reflection is very slight if you see the real, you can ask to the one who made the review. Please Sonicxtacy02, open our eyes... i would like to know your opinion about the reflection issue, maybe some photos with different image and situations would help...

                              The car market, many luxurious cars are not using high technology yet, just AG with an special touch panel, and of course never bonded. It takes time to see new technology on cars, but it's coming.
                              The major reason car makers use AG instead other ways is price and sometimes just not dared to try new tech until it's working for years. Some are going fast, i have seen even GM models using slight AG plus other technologies (not bonding needed) that looks ok.

                              About the bonding, you really like it , but to bond a touch panel to the TFT isn't only optical matter, in fact there are some other ways to get similar result without bonding. It's bonded to avoid the dust to come inside, better impact resistance and much better heat response, that's why is used mainly in aerospace, avionics and military.
                              I insist... the XF700 is bonded... specular or diffuse reflection has nothing to do with bonder or not bonded ... you can find bonded monitors not sunreadable too.

                              Your TV... you are comparing a normal glare finish TV with a sunlight readable... it's not related. My laptop is also glare finish and i cannot see anything when i work with the screen faced to the window... my desktop monitor is AG and i cannot see anything either...

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X