I think Apple chose 9.7" almost square to balance between video and reading. It looks more natural when a magazine or website is more square that rectangular e.g. 16:10.
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.
Leaked Photo of an iPad 3 Retina Display?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I think Apple chose 9.7" almost square to balance between video and reading. It looks more natural when a magazine or website is more square that rectangular e.g. 16:10.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 4.0.3; en-gb; Xoom Build/ITL41F) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Safari/534.30)
Really looking forward to the next generation of high resolution tablets and I'm especially interested in which GPU Apple is planning to power such a panel.
The iPad 2 is a stellar bit of hardware spec wise.
Really looking forward to the next generation of high resolution tablets and I'm especially interested in which GPU Apple is planning to power such a panel.
The iPad 2 is a stellar bit of hardware spec wise.
No no no....
I'm not talking about the "Aspect ratio" which is the older 4:3
We all know the arguments for and against, this. Better for reading far far worse for wide screen movies (major black bars like on an old CRT TV set)
I'm talking about the size.
They could have exactly the same 4:3 aspect ratio but have it a 10" screen.
No one would sit round a table and say, "No 10" is too big, we need 9.7"
There must be some manufacturing real world factory reason why 9.7" is being used again and again.
It may be a manufacturing reason, why it is 8.9" and no 9" in the case of other tablets, or 10.1" instead of 10"
Yep, that's it. Where do you think all the display size decisions come from? Why does the MBP have 15,4 inches? It's just the size they picked.
There's no magical boundary at 9 or 10 inches. It's just like any other size and it makes no difference in the manufacturing process. If you order enough of them you can have any size you want, otherwise you need to use what everybody else is using.
I would think originally it had something to do with the size of the pixels and how many there were. There was probably an optimum pixel size taking all factors into account and then they decided on a resolution and there was 9.7"
I simply do not believe this.
I think it's factory related. I seem to remember reading LCD panels are made from large sheets and they are cut up into smaller panels for actual products.
Given the particular process/machine for the type of machine, they must do the maths and given the factory know how, they are told the best panels to wastage ratio is something like 15.4" or 9.7" any larger and they would lose one panel, It must be the nearest size they can get out of this larger sheet with minimum wastage.
It probably has something to do with the native resolution and how small they can make the pixels... They also have to be able to make them without dead pixels and defects.
Pricing. The smaller the display, the cheaper the price. And, besides that, 9.7" was already a size that was in production at the time the iPad was announced (so mass availability).
Don't forget that the size in inches is just what marketing tells consumers.
The engineers designing the iPad, the component suppliers, the device manufacturer and the machines used to produce them will use metric measurements.
Why the screen has a diagonal size of 245mm? No idea
I bet 9.7 was because the material was a certain width and they could get another row out of they made it a hair smaller.. or a shipping reason.. they could fit 10k more per Boat Load if they cook off 1/4" in size..
Please, please, please let (some of) this extra data be for reading out a pressure sensitive stylus!!
Well, unless that's a Samsung sPad, then it's overwhelming evidence that:
1) The iPad 3 will have a retina display
2) It's in production. A late January or early February release is likely.
By the way, MacRumors, this is the kind of scoops I like to see here. They're legitimate detective work about upcoming Apple products (otherwise known as "rumours") not the lawsuit stories that make this feel place like a boring courtroom.
1) The iPad 3 will have a retina display
2) It's in production. A late January or early February release is likely.
By the way, MacRumors, this is the kind of scoops I like to see here. They're legitimate detective work about upcoming Apple products (otherwise known as "rumours") not the lawsuit stories that make this feel place like a boring courtroom.
What's the point of this supposed "leak" when there are absolutely no specs involved?
----------
It'll be related to 250mm or somesuch, most of the world, and the engineering world is metric.
----------
It'll be related to 250mm or somesuch, most of the world, and the engineering world is metric.
Yes it would:
2048 x 1536 = 3,145,728 pixels
1024 x 768 = 786,432 pixels
3,145,728 / 786,432 = 4
1024 x 768 = 786,432 pixels
3,145,728 / 786,432 = 4
EDIT: Never mind, I totally misread 2560x1600 to be 2048x1536. Pardon my ignorance.
Last edited:
Because it's a 4:3 screen. Aspect ratio is more important than having a rounded off diagonal measurement in inches.
You can have a 4:3 display ratio at any size (9.7", 9.6", 9.5" etc. or 9.8", 9.9", 10" etc.).Because it's a 4:3 screen. Aspect ratio is more important than having a rounded off diagonal measurement in inches.
Just compare it to the iPhone: the iPhone has a 3.5" 3:2 display, but there are also Android phones with a 3.5" 16:9 display.