Screen Resolution Vs Battery life

All very good points. I think what I meant is that the display scales between the resolutions and even at 260x260 it looks good squeezed in. But yeah the dpi is the same. 

I haven't used the maps much, but that's def a good use case for higher res. I think it's also where a faster processor would help out, but maybe not if the tradeoff is battery life.

Ya, I would sacrifice perhaps a couple days of battery life to get a bigger and/or higher-resolution screen, but if it causes a substantial loss in battery life (say, more than 20%) then the better screen wouldn't be worth it for me anymore. So I guess we'll just have to see what happens (that is, if anything happens, haha)

That's my point - I hate to see that happening!

Two months in I’m very happy with my fenix 6 pro screen but I’d gladly have it slightly higher res for fractionally less battery life. 
having come from touchscreen I thought I’d hate the buttons but they’re perfect and even more so in winter gloves etc. But I’d also love the addition of touchscreen IF there were sufficient controls for when it could be enabled/disabled. Ie for map pan zoom would be great. For setting up fields and layouts great. Entering data like  numbers for passcodes or workouts great. For most other things not so much. I used to have to lock my vivoactive when showering or in bed as it would mess with the watch. 

id never pay for a solar version unless the panels were of a decent enough size and technology good enough to allow significant extent of battery (or perpetual use). 

Above all these things I would rather have cell connection onboard for live tracking and emergency contact. I still carry my phone but otherwise wouldn’t bother. Be much happier to sacrifice some battery for that. 

Comparing Suunto 9 which has higher resolution to Fenix 6X, I also thought that Fenix 6X had better contrast and screen readability. I always struggled with reading Suunto 9 screen at dim lighting conditions and had to use backlight far more often than I have with Fenix 6X.

Furthermore the more pixels need to be flipped the higher power consumption is, so the higher resolution doesn't have any advantages, at least not without increasing the screen size at the same time. 

C.sco said:

I like to have lots and lots of information and detail on my maps, and find that the current pixel density really struggles with it.

I am the opposite. I think there is too much information on the map screen even in high contrast / low detail mode and would like the map screen to be simpler - using bolder lines and fewer details. That is because I want to be able to glance at the map screen while running without having to stop. For me the map has the value not in full blown navigation, e.g. figuring out what's around me but as a way to assist following a course. For example I want to be able to clearly see all side roads and trails, creek crossings, and other important terrain features along the way, as well as some points of interest and my own waypoints, but that is about it. I very rarely need to pan the map and would like a simplified UI which makes it easier to zoom but perhaps moves ability to pan further away. 

GeorgeMakrypoulias said:

I would definitely prefer increased battery life

With an IQ watchface ? Like in your photos ?

Exactly

IQ Watch face, widgets, data fields. This is the essence of Connect IQ ecosystem!!

You say you prefer battery life, but use IQ stuff ? This is a contradiction in terms

In the title you say you prefer responsive menus, but want long battery life? DCR has released a video about the Enduro. There he explains that this latest generation watch is more sluggish in response time than a fenix 6x. He asks if a weaker processor was built into the Enduro to save battery.

As long as you use IQ stuff, don't worry about the screen resolution. In this case it is negligible.