Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
52,006
13,628



ipad_2_oblique.jpg

Digitimes reports that Apple is currently evaluating a pair of options for addressing issues with LED backlighting on the iPad 3, noting that the current backlight bar design used in the iPad 2 is insufficient for the higher-resolution display reportedly set to debut in the next-generation tablet.
One of the new LED light bar designs has proposed to keep the light bar in a single-bar form factor but with two LED chips inside; the other has suggested using dual-LED light bars, the sources indicated.

Apple is likely to adopt the design using dual light bars, the sources asserted, adding that BLU makers have solved issues related heat dissipation and battery consumption for the dual light bar design.
Apple is unsurprisingly expected to introduce the iPad 3 early next year, with The Wall Street Journal being the highest-profile publication to confirm that timeline. A higher-resolution "Retina" display is the most widely-claimed enhancement scheduled for the device, although several reports have indicated that Apple's suppliers are struggling to produce the displays in volume.

Article Link: Apple Adopting Dual Light Bar System for iPad 3 Display?
 

coder12

macrumors 6502a
Jun 28, 2010
512
3
<sarcasm>
It's a bar! Apple is putting a bar in the iPad! You can get drinks from your iPad now! </sarcasm>
 
Comment

Amazing Iceman

macrumors 601
Nov 8, 2008
4,135
1,788
Florida, U.S.A.
LED Backlight is the best choice, but I guess it would decrease battery life.
One bar could cause a faded effect on the opposite end; two bars may help even out the light. I hope they do it right, otherwise the display may not have an evenly bright light.
 
Comment

Adey

macrumors regular
Feb 5, 2008
100
0
Why have two really clever bars in there?

Surely Apple can develop one really, really, really clever bar.

Call it, like "Genius Bar" or something.

No, hang on. Think they've done that one already.
 
Comment

tempusfugit

macrumors 65816
May 21, 2009
1,112
1
Chicago
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/9A404)

I'd be sort of surprised if apple went with a "retina" display with the iPad 3 considering there still isn't a single viable competitor tablet in the game.
 
Comment

charlituna

macrumors G3
Jun 11, 2008
9,633
815
Los Angeles, CA
By choosing a display with higher pixel density they need more light to provide the same brightness
[/url]

or by using 2 bars with a much lower pixel density (including perhaps the same) they might be able to produce an iPad that doesn't go practically black in sunlight and shut up the naysayers over said issue.

Frankly I haven't seen anyone really back up the need for a 300+dpi iPad so I'm thinking that Apple will either keep the same density or perhaps go slightly higher to something in the 1080-1200p range and conquer the outdoor issue first. More brightness, better sensor, perhaps major improvements on that oleo phobic coating with a touch of anti-glare tossed in. Any displays higher than that might be test units for the iPad 4, 5 or even 6. After all they don't design these things overnight.
 
Comment

Gol27

macrumors regular
Feb 28, 2011
114
0
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

tempusfugit said:
I'd be sort of surprised if apple went with a "retina" display with the iPad 3 considering there still isn't a single viable competitor tablet in the game.

See that's the thing it's all conjecture at the moment. There's nothing saying it will be the iPad 3. Apple may purely be sourcing information for the next edition.
Seems a bit late in the game for drastic design changes if they plan on an early 2012 release.
Main point is we just won't know till its announced. Sure we can make educated guesses, but that's all they are, guesses.

EDIT: ah Charlituna beat me to the same point I see lol.
 
Comment

rdas7

macrumors regular
Nov 17, 2002
165
22
London, England
There's only reason to pursue extra pixel density and increased luminescence in a display, and it's not just because Retina Displays look sharper. If you can drive twice the number of pixels, then you can drive the standard number of pixels PER EYE. Retina Displays are the stepping stone to glasses-free 3D.
 
Comment

kjs862

macrumors 65816
Jan 21, 2004
1,297
24
just hope the next iPad has a higher resolution display.
 
Comment

coolspot18

macrumors 65816
Aug 16, 2010
1,037
77
Canada
I'd be sort of surprised if apple went with a "retina" display with the iPad 3 considering there still isn't a single viable competitor tablet in the game.

Android tablets have caught up significantly... but a retina display would put the iPad 3 in the clear lead again.


Now if only the iPad 3 had a card slot or some sort of expansion port ...
 
Comment

Navdakilla

macrumors 65816
Feb 3, 2011
1,100
13
Canada
if they can do all this, maintain the same battery life and relatively same design, at the same cost!?!?!

I'm in
 
Comment

JD92

macrumors 6502a
Apr 14, 2005
934
31
I hope they go for a dual bar backlight.

Every time I've seen an iPad I've always thought the backlight looked awfully uneven, bright on one side and dark on the other. Most people don't seem to notice it, or it doesn't bother them, but it's what's stopping me buying one because I know it'd really bug me.
 
Comment

Gol27

macrumors regular
Feb 28, 2011
114
0
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

cube said:
Sony had 11" OLED TVs in 2007.

Yes but a captive touch screen is slightly different.
 
Comment

cube

Suspended
May 10, 2004
17,011
4,970
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)



Yes but a captive touch screen is slightly different.

Samsung has AMOLED capacitive touchscreens.
 
Comment

Gol27

macrumors regular
Feb 28, 2011
114
0
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

cube said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)



Yes but a captive touch screen is slightly different.

Samsung has AMOLED capacitive touchscreens.

I think the main point for me though is the user experience. I won't say that a retina screen wouldn't be better, but the reason I bought the iPad is the over all experience and ease of use. if I want to get to something it's no more than a couple of clicks away. Can it be improved? Of course everything always can be. However for me personally it's the operating system that's won me over, same with OSX on the mac.
I mean look at the origional iphone and 3G/S, still fantastic phones, I just think the retina display has spoilt people, no ones happy now unless it's retina. Where as at the time the 3GS was the best thing since sliced bread.
 
Comment

flipperfeet

macrumors regular
Aug 19, 2003
215
31
Santa Cruz, CA
or by using 2 bars with a much lower pixel density (including perhaps the same) they might be able to produce an iPad that doesn't go practically black in sunlight and shut up the naysayers over said issue.

Frankly I haven't seen anyone really back up the need for a 300+dpi iPad so I'm thinking that Apple will either keep the same density or perhaps go slightly higher to something in the 1080-1200p range and conquer the outdoor issue first. More brightness, better sensor, perhaps major improvements on that oleo phobic coating with a touch of anti-glare tossed in. Any displays higher than that might be test units for the iPad 4, 5 or even 6. After all they don't design these things overnight.

A very large number of iPads are ending up in the hands of medical professionals, 300+ dpi would provide a level of resolution exceeding desktop monitors currently being used for diagnostics in medical imaging. There is not only a need but a demand as well. And given the likely price point (same as the current models or less) this would represent a huge win.
 
Comment

cube

Suspended
May 10, 2004
17,011
4,970
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)



I think the main point for me though is the user experience. I won't say that a retina screen wouldn't be better, but the reason I bought the iPad is the over all experience and ease of use. if I want to get to something it's no more than a couple of clicks away. Can it be improved? Of course everything always can be. However for me personally it's the operating system that's won me over, same with OSX on the mac.
I mean look at the origional iphone and 3G/S, still fantastic phones, I just think the retina display has spoilt people, no ones happy now unless it's retina. Where as at the time the 3GS was the best thing since sliced bread.

Who said OLED screens cannot be high density?

----------

You mean the one that cost over $2000 and was discontinued in February of 2010?

So?
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.