Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Finally 1920x1080p screens.
- Thread starter VinegarTasters
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You are blurring the definition between PPI and DPI. They are not the same. For displays, PPI of 300+ is all that is required. 1400 DPI is for printed materials and not relevant to displays.
There is no discernible difference between 326 or 447 PPI, retina or HTC DNA display. All you are getting is a 5 inch screen. And that is fine. My opinion is that it will be a passing fad in a few years. Regarding the expert in the 2010 article you quote, he is an expert, but he doesn't support all that you say: in 2012 he called the iPhone 5 the best display of any smartphone made. Better than the iPhone 4S ( and others like the S3). Resolution is the same ( as 4S) but other factors made it the best: brightness, color accuracy, low reflectance, etc.
So if you only focus on size, then 5 inch is for you. But resolution is not a winning argument.
Last edited:
Fail. Nice try though. Try it on your screen..pinch and zoom all you like...and you will never see the pixels...
The future is coming fast and furious. Not necessarily a good thing, not necessarily a bad thing.
Ah, it's always fun when people from one camp declare that feature X is either essential or useless based solely on whether "their" platform supports it.
Retina is an Apple marketing term. It isn't real. Much higher resolutions are needed before most people can't discern the difference.
The "fact" that other phones are "too wide to use one-handed" is a fallacy. For example, the Nexus 4, a 4.7" screen, is actually, for me, easier to use than my iPhone 4S.
There are a ton of issues with Android, but wanting higher resolution and larger screens is normal, and I assure you that, 10 years down the road, you will feel foolish for thinking that the iPhone 5's 4", 1136×640 display is as good as it should get.
----------
More pixels are always better, all else being equal, but all else, mainly battery life and GPU requirements, is never equal.
Retina is an Apple marketing term. It isn't real. Much higher resolutions are needed before most people can't discern the difference.
The "fact" that other phones are "too wide to use one-handed" is a fallacy. For example, the Nexus 4, a 4.7" screen, is actually, for me, easier to use than my iPhone 4S.
There are a ton of issues with Android, but wanting higher resolution and larger screens is normal, and I assure you that, 10 years down the road, you will feel foolish for thinking that the iPhone 5's 4", 1136×640 display is as good as it should get.
----------
Maybe you need glasses, perhaps. Or, next year, if the iPad Mini, say, doubles its resolution in both directions, you'll claim that makes it better.
More pixels are always better, all else being equal, but all else, mainly battery life and GPU requirements, is never equal.
Fail. Nice try though. Try it on your screen..pinch and zoom all you like...and you will never see the pixels...
I think he was just showing what a close up of the screen looks like (via magnification). Obviously when you zoom in text will rerender itself....
Have you ever heard of, you know, personal preference?
----------
My Nexus 7 fits in my pocket. A 5" phone would be fine.
Uh, why not play a HD movie?
And you can see the pixels, that's the point.
Nope. It's around 300 ppi or around 12 lines pairs/mm at normal reading viewing distance. Optical science has held that to be the average human resolution for about 100 years. Also the eye doesn't focus closer then 6 inches or so. Of course all this depends on other factors such as image contrast.
Btw, the mini is not 'retina' quality so it will improve.
----------
But you don't see the background white pixels. Ever. Unless you use a magnifying glass. But that is not the issue here.
Last edited:
That's the same thing they did when the iPhone 4 came out to showcase how good it was. Now there is something better out.....you can't see white background pixels on a 3GS, that doesn't mean the screen shouldn't be better then that....
Woah, it's a good thing Apple made it just exactly 4"! How did they know your screen size max limit? They're amazing.
I find it interesting that your whole post is about your decision to buy an iPhone based on your personal preference. But when other people use their own personal preference to choose a product for themselves that happens to not fit your personal preference, you have to mock them.
So using personal preference to aid in your purchasing decision is OK for you but not for others? Way to stay consistent.
Demand? 1080p screens are useful if our phones have 256 GB/512 GB flash storage, so that we can store high resolution videos on these phones. Yes, we can do this today, but only a limited number of these video files fits in 64-80 GB.
Modern Java-JIT-compilers generate code which runs at the same speed or faster compared with GCC generated code.
Last edited:
Apple is reminding me of my BlackBerry days, I refused to try iPhone or android. After three Berries I had enough because like what Apple is doing with the 4, 4S and 5 RIM wasn't giving me anything new. The two are alike that both last device I bought only lasted two weeks.
I love Mac but I'm done with Apple until they make some changes.
I love Mac but I'm done with Apple until they make some changes.
Interesting point of view. The GUI on OS X 10.7.x & 10.8.x is awful and iOS is too limiting. I hope Mr. Ive can change this.
Not true. Did you even read my link? Or maybe this one? Or any of the others on the topic?
300ppi at 12" isn't even close.
----------
Or, you know, you could stream.
Stream 1080p video over WiFi? Maybe if you have the right streaming server and wifi router.
Read too many people having issues with streaming 1080p video without buffering, stuttering, audio issue, and constant pauses.
----------
I love how Android keeps pushing the cell phone screen size.
In 5 years, Android phones with 9.7" screens and 2048 x 1536 resolutions will be standard.
I don't seem to ever have issues (wirelessly) streaming 1080p to Netflix on a Roku box; I'm not sure why a phone would have issues either. The bandwidth requirements are within even current cellular capabilities, albeit the latest and greatest ones (it seems 10+ Mbps is required).
Sure it has an amazing display but going by the reviews the device can barely keep up with all those pixels and it lags frequently.
Some of the Android OEMs are just on a race to have the biggest screens with the most pixels crammed into them but in so doing sacrifice speed/performance and battery life. This is very much how it goes on the PC industry where the likes of Dell and HP adopt the newest things faster than Apple but in the end offer a subpar product.
So if Apple pushes insane pixels in laptops, they're innovators. But if OEMs push insane pixels in smartphones, who needs all those extra pixels?!
Note: I love the Retina Macbook and plan to own one.
Note: I love the Retina Macbook and plan to own one.
You are forgetting the affects of MTF on resolution. But even so, there is a difference between what is the best possible and what is the most common
From the comments in your article referenced above:
"I was also recently questioning this “Retina display” claim myself and came across your post and it was a good starting point to answering my questions. The example from the clarkvision site is correct, except that to assume .3 arc minutes as the maximum acuity of the human eye is pretty bold. That would correspond to reading about the 20/7 line on the chart when getting your eyes examined. 20/7 is theoretically possible based on the spacing of the photoreceptors, but we consider 20/20 “perfect” and acuity better than that is fairly uncommon. Using the example, and assuming “only” 20/20 vision of the user results in (53*60)/1 x (35*60)/1 = 3180 x 2100 or about 6.7 MP. For the 3180 pixels width along the 20 inch side, you get 159 ppi. Double that for holding the phone at 10 inches and you’re at 318 ppi, which is less than the 326 ppi of the iPhone4. I’m an Android and PC guy myself, so I really wanted Steve to be wrong on this one, but it looks like for most people he is actually correct."
And for most images, except for black on pure white text, it is less than that.
So I stand by my comments. And if you say I need glasses, which I have, my doc only corrects to 20/20.
Last edited:
Because a Roku is plugged in to a power source and the wifi optimize for throughput, while your phone/tablet often runs on battery and the wifi chipset is optimize for energy efficiency. Roku probably has a much higher power wifi chipset offering better throughput and range than your phone/tablet.
Roku is a dedicated TV device that's often used in a stationary setting. I have no problems letting it buffer for 10 minutes, but I'm not going wait 10 minutes for a 1080p movie to buffer on my phone/tablet.
Streaming a 1080p movie will probably use up the phone/tablet battery much faster than playing a 1080p movie from your local storage on your phone/tablet because your wifi is constantly on during streaming.
Playing a 1080p movie will probably use up the battery much faster than playing a 720p movie because it's more taxing on the CPU/GPU.
Is there really a big difference between 720p or 1080p video playing on your 5" or 7" device?
Hotel wifi suck. I get faster download from my cellphone often times.
Do I really want to stream a 1080p movie over cellular? My 5GB data limit will be used up after streaming one movie.
You never had any problems streaming from Netflix? I guess that depends on where you live, your ISP, and the time of the day you are viewing the Netflix movie.