They stated that a "retina" screen is when the pixels are not visible when the screen is held 10" to 12" or so away from your eyes. The iPhone 4 just so happened to be 326 ppi.
Where are you getting the idea that Apple is using a low quality display for the iPad3?
If the iPad3 resolution rumors are true, its going to be the only tablet on the market that'll have that kind of pixel density for at least until 2H or 3Q.
Quote:
Apple made up this term and never said that 300 ppi minimum is what classifies a device as "retina".
Steve Jobs was actually quite clear on that.
I'd take 1280x720 over 4096x3072. 4:3 is an utterly terrible resolution for consumption. 1080p vs 2048x1536? Isn't even remotely close for most consumers- if you disagree look at those 4:3 monitors and TVs flying off shelves
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/06/iphone-4-retina/
Try closer to 500ppi at 12 inches. We can use real world measurements, or Apple marketing. Using real world(477ppi), 4000x3000 just clears it for a 10" tablet. Apple marketing claimed 300, I was being generous.
Where are you getting the idea it is going to be great if it is a certain resolution? I'm *not* saying it will be bad or good, but saying it is going to be great because of the resolution they are going to use just seems assinine to me.
What are you considering a tablet? 256 PPI would be the metric. You should narrow down your requirements(that metric has already been surpassed, the bar you are indicating is actually pretty low).
The upcoming screen will likely be pretty impressive, Apple really doesn't care about specs, but the experience, and the specs necessary to give that experience.
We'll know soon enough
If they care so much about the experience how do you explain the iPad and iPad 2 displays, the pixel density was simply awful making the display visibly inferior to any of their high end Android competitors. Heck, even the display on a Nook Color is better than the one in an iPad 2.
Anand seems to think its good enough too.
I'm getting the idea (along with others in this thread) that it'll be a great display because of it being IPS + 2048x1536 pixels.
A tablet is determined by the manufacturer that sells it as a tablet. If the iPad3 has the rumored resolution, then it'll have the highest pixel density display for a tablet for the time being and probably for a good while.
Randomly changing the resolution to 1280x800 or 1366x768 will force upscaling and make apps look like crap. Pixel doubling does not.
He also couldn't tell the difference between bilinear and trilinear filtering on a R9700Pro, I wasted $300 trusting Anand's eyes once, never again The iP4's display isn't anything approaching impressive to my eyes, wouldn't be even if it wasn't the size of a postage stamp(not that that has anything to do with the iPad3). Muted colors, horrid contrast and very slow(the latter two are simply native to the inferior technology they use). With the staggering advancement in the OLED sector, a minor resolution bump for antiquated technology isn't anything worth getting excited about to me.
IPS+ with increased resolution is certainly one way to do something different. Honestly, and you can feel free to check my post history, these relatively mild bumps in resolution are nothing compared to dumping the antiquated LCD technology and moving on to something much better. I would take a 720p SAMOLED over a 1080p SIPS+ display even if I had to pay a premium, but Apple is known for beating a dead technology into the ground long after it is remotely acceptable(Moto 68K CPUs, then PPC CPUs, SCSI, the list goes on and on). When the iPad3 is sitting next to the GTab 7.7 it is highly unlikely that it is going to be the more appealing display. I hear a lot of people talking about color calibration on the panels, that is something that can easily be tuned by the manufacturer, LCD's natrual severe limitations can not.
The Note has a higher PPI.
/facepalm
1024x768= 786,432
2048x1536= 3,145,728
Pixel doubling would give you all sorts of issues with proper scaling, they are quadrupling the resolution. 1080p is roughly a pixel doubling over 720p to give you an idea how quickly pixel density scales on displays.
Now if Apple came out and said the iPad3 was going to be a SAMOLED display running 20x15 it would be a lot more interesting, if only they would swap to a current millenia form factor for their display.
http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/06/iphone-4-retina/
Try closer to 500ppi at 12 inches. We can use real world measurements, or Apple marketing. Using real world(477ppi), 4000x3000 just clears it for a 10" tablet. Apple marketing claimed 300, I was being generous.
3) So what does all this mean?
Let me make this clear: if you have perfect eyesight, then at one foot away the iPhone 4′s pixels are resolved. The picture will look pixellated. If you have average eyesight, the picture will look just fine.
So in a sense, both Jobs and Soneira are correct. At the very worst, you could claim Jobs exaggerated; his claim is not true if you have perfect vision. But for a lot of people, I would even say most people, youll never tell the difference. And if you hold the phone a few inches farther away itll look better.
Apple is probably already going to be having too much trouble sourcing the iPad 3 display as it is.
Seriously, though, anyone want to place bets on how long before Apple makes a play for a display manufactruer?
From my own experience of using an ipad and various droid devices - I find the ipad more enjoyable to use. There is just something about the device that makes it a lot more fun to use than a droid device.
I'd take 1280x720 over 4096x3072. 4:3 is an utterly terrible resolution for consumption. 1080p vs 2048x1536? Isn't even remotely close for most consumers- if you disagree look at those 4:3 monitors and TVs flying off shelves
That's very subjective though. Comparing an iPad 2 vs a Asus Transformer I found Honeycomb to offer a vastly superior user interface. In contrast the entire time I was using the iPad I kept thinking that it should be a 7" or smaller device since the vast majority of the display area was completely wasted.
do you hold your tv in your hands? do you rotate and carry them around with you?
iPad's 4:3 aspect ratio is perfect for its purpose, web browsing and reading. After using an iPad, I just couldn't get used to the 16:9 aspect ratio of android tablets, they just felt weird and uncomfortable to hold in your hands, portrait mode is pretty much useless.
I feel the complete opposite, 7" inch tablets are too small for browsing, web sites need to be panned around.
honeycomb is such a failure even google admits it was a rushed job.
He also couldn't tell the difference between bilinear and trilinear filtering on a R9700Pro, I wasted $300 trusting Anand's eyes once, never again The iP4's display isn't anything approaching impressive to my eyes, wouldn't be even if it wasn't the size of a postage stamp(not that that has anything to do with the iPad3). Muted colors, horrid contrast and very slow(the latter two are simply native to the inferior technology they use). With the staggering advancement in the OLED sector, a minor resolution bump for antiquated technology isn't anything worth getting excited about to me.
IPS+ with increased resolution is certainly one way to do something different. Honestly, and you can feel free to check my post history, these relatively mild bumps in resolution are nothing compared to dumping the antiquated LCD technology and moving on to something much better. I would take a 720p SAMOLED over a 1080p SIPS+ display even if I had to pay a premium, but Apple is known for beating a dead technology into the ground long after it is remotely acceptable(Moto 68K CPUs, then PPC CPUs, SCSI, the list goes on and on). When the iPad3 is sitting next to the GTab 7.7 it is highly unlikely that it is going to be the more appealing display. I hear a lot of people talking about color calibration on the panels, that is something that can easily be tuned by the manufacturer, LCD's natrual severe limitations can not.
The Note has a higher PPI.
/facepalm
1024x768= 786,432
2048x1536= 3,145,728
Pixel doubling would give you all sorts of issues with proper scaling, they are quadrupling the resolution. 1080p is roughly a pixel doubling over 720p to give you an idea how quickly pixel density scales on displays.
Now if Apple came out and said the iPad3 was going to be a SAMOLED display running 20x15 it would be a lot more interesting, if only they would swap to a current millenia form factor for their display.
Well that's your opinion. Anand wasn't the only one to give Steve Jobs a pass on the retina term. Looks like you totally ignored my other link.
Trust me, everyone is gonna be drooling over the ipad3 display, even you despite your distaste for apple.
A retina SAMOLED 10" display ain't gonna happen because the technology isn't available.
do you hold your tv in your hands? do you rotate and carry them around with you?
Ignored what in your other link? That if someone has less the optimal vision a lower PPI will be equal to a 'retina' display? If someone is legally blind, the iPhone 3G is a retina display. It isn't ignoring anything, the ability to resolve resolutions changing on the limits of site for the particular person is a given.