Apple, here is why the iPad 2 should have a 1280x960 or 1920x1440 resolution!

Discussion in 'iPad' started by wikoogle, Jan 30, 2011.

  1. wikoogle, Jan 30, 2011
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2011

    wikoogle macrumors 6502a

    wikoogle

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #1
    Both those resolutions maintain the exact same 4:3 aspect ratio as the current iPad, while also being to able to display multiple iPhone 4 apps side by side in their native resolution, and being able to display HD videos and content in it's resolution. The current resolution (1024x768) can not do either.

    1024x768 times 1.25 = 1280x960. Apple could easily take advantage of the dual core gpu rumored to be in the next iPad to perfectly scale all iPad 1 apps by 1.25. Apple could also release a tool that allows app developers to very rapidly up-convert all of their apps to 1.25 their original resolution with minimal effort.

    There's a multitude of reasons why a resolution of 1280x960 makes much more sense than the current resolution of 1024x768...

    1. 1280x960 is exactly double the iPhone 4's resolution (640x960). It could display two iPhone 4 apps in their native resolution side by side. That can open the iPad up to a lot of useful functionality, and multitasking in a new way. They could make use of the dual core cpu and gpu to display two iPhone 4 apps side by side simultanously. Facetime/skype someone while browsing the web. Browse the web while checking your emails. There's a lot of neat possibilities.

    2. 1280x960 is perfect for 720p movie playback. 720p content plays at a resolution of 1280x720. Many movies, videos and tv shows including all the hd content in iTunes are optimized to play at that resolution. Being able to natively display that resolution (with two slim horizontal black bars), would allow for optimum picture quality without any of the pixelation and artifacts that occur when you scale a video to something other than it's native resolution.

    For very similar reasons, a resolution of 1920x1440 also make a lot of sense for the iPad. And that resolution would allow Apple to claim that the iPad has a retina display at a distance of just 14 inches or so while playing back 1080p videos in their native resolution and displaying 3 iPhone 4 apps side by side in their native resolution.

    Not using a resolution of 1280x960 for the original iPad was a mistake by Apple, and one that Apple could and should easily correct with the iPad 2. It's comparable to Apple's oversight in not including a facetime camera and 512mbs of ram in the original iPad. They are fixing both issues with the iPad 2 and Apple will hopefully correct this oversight as well.

    The rumored resolution of 2048 by 1536 is unrealistic for a couple of reasons. For one, it's prohibitively expensive to get a touch screen at that resolution. Not even $3000 Macbook Pros pack in a screen with that high a resolution, and this is without being multitouch. In addition, that resolution creates numerous challenges to content makers and app developers since so few images and so little content is available at such high resolutions and having games running at that resolution would significantly tax both the graphics card and the gpu. Lastly 2048x1536 is just a really odd resolution for a display. Even websites will look odd, and in some cases will be very poorly formatted to display at such an odd and high resolution. 1280x960 however is very doable, 1920x1440 would likewise work very well.

    Before someone mentions pixel doubling. Pixel doubling doesn't work. The iPhone 4 had exactly double the resolution of the iPhone 3G/3GS. Yet, this didn't cause them to look as nice as they do on an iPhone 3G/3GS

    Even with pixel doubling, iPhone 3G/3GS apps look horrible on the iPhone 4, far worse than they ever looked on the iPhone 3G. Pixel doubling doesn't have the advertized effect, the old apps still look horrible, so it's pointless. These resolutions scale old apps the same way pixel doubling does, they would look no worse. In fact, with some post processing/anti-aliasing using the GPU, they could look far better.

    Lastly, the iPad's bezel is smideon too think and a 10" screen sounds far better than a 9.7" screen does. Apple could and should upgrade to a 10" screen in the future higher resolution iPad while keeping the iPad the same size and simply cutting down on the bezel slightly.
     
  2. zunairryk macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    #2
    Cool idea but I doubt if apple will actually do this. They want developers to write apps specifically for iPad resolution.

    Edit: Title is misleading.
     
  3. Gryzor macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #3
    Do you really think Apple are stupid? Do you really think they would include all those things you wanted in the original iPad? Stuff is held back for a lot of technical, financial and marketing reasons. You really don't know much about product development and marketing do you?
     
  4. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #4
    Well, I think the rumor has been put to bed for the most part. I think the consensus is that the iPad2's display will remain the same.

    Even if its not, I'm pretty sure that apple has some extremely smart engineers working what display, resolution and configuration would work best. So having a random person on the internet saying how its not feasible doesn't really mean much. Personally, I don't get worked up about these rumors and take a wait and see attitude.

    btw, people have been saying for years that apple cannot do X because its not feasible, expensive or just too risky yet they push the envelope and produce products that sell like hot cakes.

    The cost argument that was used for the iPad, in that apple could not possible provide a tablet computer at a price point that would make it successful - but look what happened.
     
  5. wikoogle, Jan 31, 2011
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2011

    wikoogle thread starter macrumors 6502a

    wikoogle

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #5
    No duh, Sherlock.

    Of course I don't think Apple is stupid. But that doesn't mean they are perfect either. I do think it was a mistake for them not to use a 1280x960 resolution in the original iPad, and I explained why in the OP. Yes, of course there was probably a financial reason or production reason why they weren't able to.

    But that doesn't change the fact that 1280x960 would have made a lot more sense than the current resolution (1024x768).

    Having a screen that is exactly double the resolution of the iPhone 4 makes sense.

    Being able to playback 1280x720 (720p) videos in their native resolution makes sense, especially considering that this is the resolution that all of HD content, movies and tv shows available on iTunes is rendered at.

    For very similar reasons, a resolution of 1920x1440 also make a lot of sense for the iPad. And that resolution would allow Apple to claim that the iPad has a retina display at a distance of just 14 inches or so while playing back 1080p videos in their native resolution and displaying 3 iPhone 4 apps side by side in their native resolution.

    And it's not too late for Apple to implement that resolution, and when they do update the resolution on the iPad this is either the most likely, or the second most likely resolution that they will update to. Since it retains the same aspect ratio as the original iPad, Apple could easily scale all the iPad 1 content apps by 1.25 in order to have them retain perfect backwards compatiblity with a 1280x960 iPad.
     
  6. Zcott macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2009
    Location:
    Belfast, Ireland
    #6
    I think you're forgetting that watching movies is just one thing you can do on an iPad. It's not everything you can do on an iPad, and I, for one, haven't ever watched more than about half an hour of video on my iPad.

    iBooks, games, web browsing, typing in portrait, all of these things become nightmarish on a widescreen device in portrait orientation.
     
  7. wikoogle thread starter macrumors 6502a

    wikoogle

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #7
    These are not widescreen resolutions though. Both the resolutions I'm proposing 1280x960 and 1920x1440 have the same IDENTICAL 4:3 aspect ratio as the current iPad.

    iBooks, games, web browsing, typing, all of those tasks would be identical if apple opts for one of these resolutions (they would just be displaying in a higher resolution).

    However, these resolutions have the advantages of being able to display multiple iPhone 4 apps in their native resolutions, and also being able to playback HD content in their native resolutions, while changing nothing at all about the iPad's dimensions.
     
  8. darngooddesign macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #8
    1920x1440 doesn't give clean scaling of apps.
     
  9. wikoogle, Jan 31, 2011
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2011

    wikoogle thread starter macrumors 6502a

    wikoogle

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    #9
    It allows for a perfect scaling of apps.

    There is no such thing as "clean" scaling of apps. The iPhone 4 had exactly double the resolution of the iPhone 3G/3GS. Yet, this didn't cause them to scale cleanly.

    Even with pixel doubling, iPhone 3G/3GS apps look horrible on the iPhone 4, far worse than they ever looked on the iPhone 3G. Pixel doubling doesn't have the advertized effect, the old apps still look horrible, so it's pointless. These resolutions scale old apps the same way pixel doubling does, they would look no worse. In fact, with some post processing/anti-aliasing using the GPU, they could look far better.

    Edit: Just wanted to address many of the clueless posts made below this one, No, a 1.25x increase in scale will not be any harder a transition for developers than a 2x increase in scale. All the work will be done by the GPU, zero developer work involved. Yes, I am saying that post processing effects like antialiasing will do a far better job of making the image look good than pixel doubling. The iPhone 4 exactly quadrupled the resolution of the iPhone 3GS/3G/Original. Every pixel on an old app was represented by exactly four pixels on the iPhone 4, this is pixel doubling, and the iPhone 4 does it. iPhone 3G/3GS apps look really ugly on the iPhone 4, far more ugly than they did on the 3G/3GS. Pixel doubling doesn't magically make up for the fact that screen is not the app's native resolution. Don't believe me, run an iPhone 3GS app on an iPhone 4, it will look very ugly. Anti-aliasing/upconverting/post processing however do work. Those are all proven techniques.

    If you still don't get it, maybe you'll understand Eso's explanation...

    It's amazing how many people without the slightest clue what they're actually talking about are quick to make statements about how a 1.25x increase in scale is so much harder for developers than a 2x increase.

    Apple could indeed upgrade to a resolution of 1280x960 and the 1.25x interpolation of old apps can be handled entirely by the gpu, no developer work needed.
     
  10. LegendKillerUK macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    #10
    Pixel doubling only takes place on the iPad. What you're seeing on the iPhone is just a stretched image. The text and controls are rendered properly but the artwork is not.
     
  11. SA22C macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2010
    Location:
    Top Gear Test Track.
    #11
    Exactly. I've got an original iPhone next to my iPhone 4 right now and I've checked more than a few non-Retina apps side-by-side. They look pretty much the same.

    The iPad aspect ratio isn't changing and the resolution won't until pixel-doubling can be achieved with the mobile GPU. Case closed.
     
  12. smetvid macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    #12
    People are way too hung up on resolution. Resolution is not the most important aspect of the iPad and in my opinion is the last thing that needs upgrading right now.

    Video already looks great on the iPad. If you want perfect non scaled video on the iPad then encode your HD videos at 1024x576. Other then that I think most people would have a very hard time telling the difference between 1024x576 and 1280x720 scaled down to fit the display. Only the most insane video freaks would be able to notice a difference. I am a professional video and animation designer and I don't even consider it to be a big deal.

    Don't get hung up by the numbers. Resolution is the least important aspect of video quality.
     
  13. samiznaetekto macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2009
    #13
    LOL. I don't think you understand how scaling works. You're saying that 1.25x scaling will be more clean than 2x? LOL.
     
  14. hcho3 macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    May 13, 2010
    #14
    All you are talking about is just resolution and resolution. The apps are not going to rescale themselves. It has been said many times by apple and developers that it is a a lot easier to just rescale apps by making it 2X resolution rather than 1.5, 1.25.

    If some developers decide not to rescale their apps, then app store will have fragmentation like android.

    You really really don't know how the marketing or developing apps work.
     
  15. elan123 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2011
    #15
    bingo!

    Distortion FTL
     
  16. colmaclean macrumors 68000

    colmaclean

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Berlin
    #16
    Multiple iPhone apps visible simultaneously on the iPad. Interesting concept - I can imagine a few app combos that would be useful side-by-side.

    Chances of it making it into the SDK? 0.0001%
     
  17. jmpnop macrumors 6502a

    jmpnop

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2010
    #17
    Pixel doubling will not create problems for developers. Any other custom resolution will give nightmares to developers. Any resolution will be x times the current one (x being real) but the point is x has to be an interger.

    Moreover it looks senseless for Apple to keep on introducing new resolutions with every revision. They've invested in 1024X768 resolution and will not change it for quite a time, atleast till iPad 3. By then technology will have become cheaper and may work out for Apple to implement it on a consumer device.
     
  18. Julien macrumors G3

    Julien

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #18
    While Apple "should" have 1280x960 or 1920x1440, Apple MUST have $499. $499 will trump all improvements/enhancements and unfortunately higher resolution screens are more expensive than most other changes, like dual core A5.
     
  19. mklnk macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    #19
    I think what you meant to say there was, "I'm not a programmer."
     
  20. colmaclean macrumors 68000

    colmaclean

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Berlin
    #20
    Haha, definitely sounds more like project manager material. All he needs to master is the phrase "is it ready yet?".
     
  21. mouthster macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2005
    #21
    Can't believe Apple hasn't hired the OP yet..:rolleyes:
     
  22. dal20402 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2006
    #22
    Pixel-doubled graphics in apps only look bad on the iPhone 4 because they stand in contrast with the sharpness of native-resolution text and vector art.

    They are exactly the same quality as they are on the 3G/3GS because... they are exactly the same. 4 iPhone 4 pixels are exactly the same size and shape as one iPhone 3GS pixel.

    If you think pixel-doubled iPhone 4 apps look bad, try scaling your Mac desktop to 1.25 using Universal Access and see just what you think of that. It's much worse.

    2560x1600 is the only reasonable resolution for a higher-resolution iPad, and the screens will show up eventually. Everyone thought a 960x640 3.5" screen was ridiculous too, until they showed up.
     
  23. rmitchell248 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2010
    Location:
    Liebsthal, Germany
    #23
    has anyone ever mentioned your fantastic way with people?
     
  24. Eso, Jan 31, 2011
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2011

    Eso macrumors 68000

    Eso

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    #24
    Most of you don't even know what you are talking about. Scaling by any factor is exactly the same amount of work for developers. Before they update their apps, it doesn't take anything because scaling, whether 1.25x using interpolation or 2x using pixel doubling, is handled automatically. If they update their apps, it takes the same amount of work whether they double the size of all their graphics or just make them 1.25 times bigger.

    There's only one real difference - pixel doubling makes graphics blocky, interpolation makes them slighty blurry (and other elements are automatically rendered at native resolution in iOS). In either case, increasing resolution means that the size of each pixel gets smaller so the distortion is less noticeable.

    Pixel doubling is not special because it is 2x - it's special because the size of each pixel on the iPhone 4 is exactly 1/4 the size of the previous screens, so the effect with non-retina graphics is that they look identical on both screens. For any graphics without a lot of hard (high-contrast) edges, however, interpolation would actually look better than pixel doubling on the retina display.
     
  25. bluemonkeyguy macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2010
    #25
    I swear, posting anything about resolution on any MacRumors forum instantly makes everyone Apple certified screen engineers. Just look at my thread about the 1080p issue with the iMac and people get brain ****ed because of decimal resolutions. Seriously:rolleyes:
     

Share This Page