Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Targeting Third-Generation iPad for Doubled Display Resolution?

JPark said:
No need for the eye roll. Unless you can afford to buy every single release of a product, it makes sense to time your purchase so that you get the features you most care about.
Click to expand...

Maybe.But the problem is many of these same people consider themselves superior life forms and are keen to share the fact that they are wisely waiting for the next one every time the subject of the device in question comes up.

"I hear the next iPad will have cameras"

"I'm SOOOOO glad I waited!God I'm smart!"

Kind of boorish and tiresome,especially when I'm totally loving my iPad and can't imagine doing without it all this time.If the next one is worth it to me,I'll sell my 1st gen and buy it.The difference will be a small price to pay for a year's use.
 
iPad Retina Display

So this discussion of the Retina Display coming to iPad is really ridiculous. First read below the description of the Retina Display as quoted from Jobs (found in MacRumors article, "Apple Announces iPhone 4 with Retina Display, HD Video Recording, More"):

"iPhone 4 will also have a Retina Display, a new display technology that packs in 326 pixels per inch, compared to the current iPhone's 163 ppi. Noting that the detection limit of the human eye is 300 ppi"

The "detection limit of the human eye is 300 ppi". This means that at any distance the human eye can see a maximum of 300 ppi. If the iPad were to double its resolution to 2048 x 1536 it would come nowhere near the resolution required to be a Retina Display.

The current display is 132 ppi and 1024 x 768 with a 9.7" diagonal. 1024/132 = 7.758 (the height in inches of the iPad screen). 768/132 = 5.818 (the width in inches of the iPad screen). At 300 ppi (the Retina Display minimum ppi) the iPad display would have to be 2,328 (7.758 * 300) x 1,745 (5.818 * 300) in resolution to be considered a Retina Display. Additionally, if the iPhone and iPod touch screens are being manufactured at 326 ppi, it stands to reason the iPad Retina Display would come in at the same ppi. This means the iPad Retina Display would most likely be a resolution of 2,529 x 1,897.

First off, that is much higher than the rumored 2048 x 1536. Secondly, do you know what other displays that is higher than... essentially everyone that Apple has ever made. The screen would be the same resolution as the 27" LED Cinema Display (2,540 x 1,920), only in 9.7".

Please Apple, give me a reason to buy iPad 2, impress me. But a display upgrade like that in 12 months? Come on everyone, you ask too much. The cost must be incredible!

By the way, I do think the iPad resolution will double, but truly double. In other words, go from 786,432 (1,024 * 768) pixels on a 9.7" screen to 1,572,864 pixels on a 9.7" screen. This means a screen resolution of approximately 1,448 x 1,086 should be expected.

Thanks for reading my first post!:apple:
 
msb3079 said:
Text simply is not pleasing to the eye and easy to look at. Look at text on an iPhone 4, then go back to the iPad. I know that analogy has been beaten to death, but it's true.
Click to expand...

Of course the iPhone 4 looks better. Obviously. But that doesn't make the iPad "illegible." Not even close.

Oddly I haven't heard many people griping about reading text on their computer displays in recent years, and the iPad's screen matches or exceeds those. (Nor did I hear many people griping about iPhone legibility when the iPhone was originally released.)

Will a retina display on an iPad be awesome when it eventually gets here? Definitely. Is the iPad a sub-par device in the meantime? No way.

More RAM, the rumored bigger audio speaker, and a front-facing camera are higher on my iPad wishlist than a super-res display that would far outclass any touch display we've seen so far.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

LorengeU2 said:
So this discussion of the Retina Display coming to iPad is really ridiculous. First read below the description of the Retina Display as quoted from Jobs (found in MacRumors article, "Apple Announces iPhone 4 with Retina Display, HD Video Recording, More"):

"iPhone 4 will also have a Retina Display, a new display technology that packs in 326 pixels per inch, compared to the current iPhone's 163 ppi. Noting that the detection limit of the human eye is 300 ppi"

The "detection limit of the human eye is 300 ppi". This means that at any distance the human eye can see a maximum of 300 ppi. If the iPad were to double its resolution to 2048 x 1536 it would come nowhere near the resolution required to be a Retina Display.

The current display is 132 ppi and 1024 x 768 with a 9.7" diagonal. 1024/132 = 7.758 (the height in inches of the iPad screen). 768/132 = 5.818 (the width in inches of the iPad screen). At 300 ppi (the Retina Display minimum ppi) the iPad display would have to be 2,328 (7.758 * 300) x 1,745 (5.818 * 300) in resolution to be considered a Retina Display. Additionally, if the iPhone and iPod touch screens are being manufactured at 326 ppi, it stands to reason the iPad Retina Display would come in at the same ppi. This means the iPad Retina Display would most likely be a resolution of 2,529 x 1,897.

First off, that is much higher than the rumored 2048 x 1536. Secondly, do you know what other displays that is higher than... essentially everyone that Apple has ever made. The screen would be the same resolution as the 27" LED Cinema Display (2,540 x 1,920), only in 9.7".

Please Apple, give me a reason to buy iPad 2, impress me. But a display upgrade like that in 12 months? Come on everyone, you ask too much. The cost must be incredible!

By the way, I do think the iPad resolution will double, but truly double. In other words, go from 786,432 (1,024 * 768) pixels on a 9.7" screen to 1,572,864 pixels on a 9.7" screen. This means a screen resolution of approximately 1,448 x 1,086 should be expected.

Thanks for reading my first post!:apple:
Click to expand...

1st of all, that's a really odd resolution. Scaling would be a nightmare.

Secondly, you don't understand the concept of pixel doubling. The point of it is to greatly increase the resolution and for easy scaling; which are not accomplished by your prediction.
 
LagunaSol said:
Of course the iPhone 4 looks better. Obviously. But that doesn't make the iPad "illegible." Not even close.

Oddly I haven't heard many people griping about reading text on their computer displays in recent years, and the iPad's screen matches or exceeds those. (Nor did I hear many people griping about iPhone legibility when the iPhone was originally released.)

Will a retina display on an iPad be awesome when it eventually gets here? Definitely. Is the iPad a sub-par device in the meantime? No way.

More RAM, the rumored bigger audio speaker, and a front-facing camera are higher on my iPad wishlist than a super-res display that would far outclass any touch display we've seen so far.
Click to expand...

Completely irrelevant comparison. The reason I don't notice any quality difference with my iMac compared with the iPhone is that I sit across the desk from my iMac, further than arms length. My massive HDTV also has less ppi than my iphone 4 and I don't complain about that either.

The chart lowed down on this page explains it all: http://www.appleinsider.com/article..._screens_matter_for_apples_ipad_2.html&page=3
 
matkap said:
One of best comments.. Apple should do something to differentiate ipad from all other tablets. Best way is a great screen. So, who knows. This is Apple, they love surprising us ;)
Click to expand...

I think Apple's way of being competitive with the iPad is price. Since a tablet is not a computer/laptop replacement, it should not cost someone a fortune. And in order to do so, Apple is adding a 1mp camera instead of 5mp. Apple has never been in the race for the best tech, so I'm not surprised by the 1mp camera or lack of a retina display. Don't get me wrong, I am hella annoyed by that, but if I'm Steve Jobs or Tim Cook, I would not make a significant upgrade now since the iPad already has +80% market share.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPad; U; CPU OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

saxamoophone said:
A few things


- iOS and OS X will merge in a few years. We've seen the UI start to match, and no doubt most of the code is the same anyways.

- The iPad is more of a computer than a phone. So I would expect Apple to start to market it as such.

Why can't we have TWO or THREE iPad models this year.

iPad lite - The current gen, starting at $449.

iPad - 2nd Gen with better processor, memory (528), graphics card, etc: Priced at $549.

iPad Pro - 2nd gen with the upgraded Screen, 1gig of memory. Prices at $649.

Eventually the upper versions of the iPad will be full blown computers running MAC OS X with NO tradeoffs like we see in Windows 7 tablets.
Click to expand...

I see the merge coming around the time of the release of windows 8. There will be full windows 8 tablets since it supports ARM chipsets so Apple will probably have to match.
 
saxamoophone said:
A few things


- iOS and OS X will merge in a few years. We've seen the UI start to match, and no doubt most of the code is the same anyways.

- The iPad is more of a computer than a phone. So I would expect Apple to start to market it as such.

Why can't we have TWO or THREE iPad models this year.

iPad lite - The current gen, starting at $449.

iPad - 2nd Gen with better processor, memory (528), graphics card, etc: Priced at $549.

iPad Pro - 2nd gen with the upgraded Screen, 1gig of memory. Prices at $649.

Eventually the upper versions of the iPad will be full blown computers running MAC OS X with NO tradeoffs like we see in Windows 7 tablets.
Click to expand...

Your Point 1, Disagree. iOS is made for small, portable touch screen devices. MacOSX for computers. Don't see it. Each needs something different.

iPad is not "more of a computer than a phone" because it's not a phone. It's a portable media device. Guess, I'm just not getting the point here.

Third point... I just don't see it. As it is there are already too many versions just based on wifi vs 3G and storage size.

Fourth point... we'll all know the truth soon. :)
 
LorengeU2 said:
So this discussion of the Retina Display coming to iPad is really ridiculous. First read below the description of the Retina Display as quoted from Jobs (found in MacRumors article, "Apple Announces iPhone 4 with Retina Display, HD Video Recording, More"):

"iPhone 4 will also have a Retina Display, a new display technology that packs in 326 pixels per inch, compared to the current iPhone's 163 ppi. Noting that the detection limit of the human eye is 300 ppi"

The "detection limit of the human eye is 300 ppi". This means that at any distance the human eye can see a maximum of 300 ppi. If the iPad were to double its resolution to 2048 x 1536 it would come nowhere near the resolution required to be a Retina Display.

The current display is 132 ppi and 1024 x 768 with a 9.7" diagonal. 1024/132 = 7.758 (the height in inches of the iPad screen). 768/132 = 5.818 (the width in inches of the iPad screen). At 300 ppi (the Retina Display minimum ppi) the iPad display would have to be 2,328 (7.758 * 300) x 1,745 (5.818 * 300) in resolution to be considered a Retina Display. Additionally, if the iPhone and iPod touch screens are being manufactured at 326 ppi, it stands to reason the iPad Retina Display would come in at the same ppi. This means the iPad Retina Display would most likely be a resolution of 2,529 x 1,897.

First off, that is much higher than the rumored 2048 x 1536. Secondly, do you know what other displays that is higher than... essentially everyone that Apple has ever made. The screen would be the same resolution as the 27" LED Cinema Display (2,540 x 1,920), only in 9.7".

Please Apple, give me a reason to buy iPad 2, impress me. But a display upgrade like that in 12 months? Come on everyone, you ask too much. The cost must be incredible!

By the way, I do think the iPad resolution will double, but truly double. In other words, go from 786,432 (1,024 * 768) pixels on a 9.7" screen to 1,572,864 pixels on a 9.7" screen. This means a screen resolution of approximately 1,448 x 1,086 should be expected.

Thanks for reading my first post!:apple:
Click to expand...

I don't see how it's a bigger jump than the jump made from the earlier iPhones to the iPhone 4. The iPhone 4 would have a greater DPI than the 260 rumored with the next iPad display. Plus, adding in the fact that the iPhone jump was already made.. making the jump in the iPad (which is advertised to be used as a e-reader) seems like much less of a "shock" to me.
 
LagunaSol said:
Of course the iPhone 4 looks better. Obviously. But that doesn't make the iPad "illegible." Not even close.

Oddly I haven't heard many people griping about reading text on their computer displays in recent years, and the iPad's screen matches or exceeds those. (Nor did I hear many people griping about iPhone legibility when the iPhone was originally released.)

Will a retina display on an iPad be awesome when it eventually gets here? Definitely. Is the iPad a sub-par device in the meantime? No way.

More RAM, the rumored bigger audio speaker, and a front-facing camera are higher on my iPad wishlist than a super-res display that would far outclass any touch display we've seen so far.
Click to expand...

Not literally illegible.. but not pleasing enough to want to read a book on. And really... who reads a book on a laptop screen? Also laptop screens are kept further from the face than a tablet.

More RAM wouldn't hurt.. but I'd def take the screen over it. Audio speaker?? ehh... If I'm home, I'm using REAL speakers.. if I'm in pubic, I'm using headphones. Front-facing camera is a definite.. but I'd honestly still rather have the screen... I use the screen EVERY time I use the iPad... the front-facing camera.. just a small fraction.
 
lilcosco08 said:
...Secondly, you don't understand the concept of pixel doubling. The point of it is to greatly increase the resolution and for easy scaling; which are not accomplished by your prediction.
Click to expand...
It's both a question of easy scaling, quality scaling, and boosting the pixel density to a level that won't need to be changed for several generations of iPads to come. One of the glaring problems with the Android tablet market is that the form factor, display size and resolution, and pixel densities vary from product to product (are there any two that are even the same?). This is going to bite Android in the proverbial ass in a big way, to maintain a consistent level of quality nearly all Android tablet apps will have to be tweaked for each device -- the very definition of fragmentation. Contrast that with the expectation of a double-pixel-density iPad display where Apple brings everything forward by just doubling the "size" of each element in the GUI (similar treatment to the iPhone's Retina display).

Frankly, I don't expect the pixel density on the iPad to change until next year (at the earliest), but when it does that will probably be the last change in display resolution for some (many) years to come.
 
I use the iPad extensively for reading PDFs so a "Retina" display is really the only thing that would get me to upgrade. If you compare a PDF on the iPhone 4 and the iPad, the text and graphics looks so much better on the iPhone 4 it is like night and day. Of course, in the end the larger size of the iPad trumps the iPhone for reading but it gives you an idea of just how much better it could be.

I'm not waiting a whole year for an iPad 3 as other manufactures do not conform to some stupid once a year upgrade cycle and will surpass Apple long before then. They will get my money instead.
 
1984 said:
I'm not waiting a whole year for an iPad 3 as other manufactures do not conform to some stupid once a year upgrade cycle and will surpass Apple long before then. They will get my money instead.
Click to expand...

Good luck with that.
 
I think it's funny that a lot of people here take rumors as fact and already state claims about not buying it or saying Apple is screwing us. For all we know, unless it's a statement like finding the camera icons in 4.3, I take every rumor with a grain of salt.
 
iPhoneCollector said:
so the next ipad isn't going to be that great.
Click to expand...

Something tells me that it will be great enough for many current iPad owners to give their 1st gen iPad to a family member and buy one. More importantly, it will be great enough for those who decided to wait for the historically better version 2 of an Apple product.
 
Dear original ipad owners who are already complaining
Stop complaining because there are other people who have been waiting patiently to buy 2nd gen iPad. They are going to enjoy their iPad. Wait for 3rd gen like you wish, but retina display on iPad doesn't make sense right now due to the high costs and production issues.

I am willing to use my iPad until

1. Apple will stop supporting it with new OS update
Or

2. Apple releases an iPad with retina display.

Looks like iPad 3 for me and I was willing to wait until iPad 4, but surprised that they will be doing this in iPad 3.

"Apple will be left behind compare to compeitions."

No they won't unless xoom or other tablets are priced at simliar price. The world doesn't revolve around your stupid hopes and foolishness. Get out.
 
The prospect of using such a high res screen had changed my mind about getting an iPad. The screen on my friend's first generation iPad looks a little lame now compared to my iPhone 4 - especially when reading lots of text. If the second generation iPad doesn't have the rumoured double resolution display then I probably won't get one. I'd like to say that I'd hold out for a third gen one but, to be honest, by that point I will probably have lost interest.
 
LorengeU2 said:
So this discussion of the Retina Display coming to iPad is really ridiculous. First read below the description of the Retina Display as quoted from Jobs (found in MacRumors article, "Apple Announces iPhone 4 with Retina Display, HD Video Recording, More"):

"iPhone 4 will also have a Retina Display, a new display technology that packs in 326 pixels per inch, compared to the current iPhone's 163 ppi. Noting that the detection limit of the human eye is 300 ppi"

The "detection limit of the human eye is 300 ppi". This means that at any distance the human eye can see a maximum of 300 ppi. If the iPad were to double its resolution to 2048 x 1536 it would come nowhere near the resolution required to be a Retina Display.

The current display is 132 ppi and 1024 x 768 with a 9.7" diagonal. 1024/132 = 7.758 (the height in inches of the iPad screen). 768/132 = 5.818 (the width in inches of the iPad screen). At 300 ppi (the Retina Display minimum ppi) the iPad display would have to be 2,328 (7.758 * 300) x 1,745 (5.818 * 300) in resolution to be considered a Retina Display. Additionally, if the iPhone and iPod touch screens are being manufactured at 326 ppi, it stands to reason the iPad Retina Display would come in at the same ppi. This means the iPad Retina Display would most likely be a resolution of 2,529 x 1,897.

First off, that is much higher than the rumored 2048 x 1536. Secondly, do you know what other displays that is higher than... essentially everyone that Apple has ever made. The screen would be the same resolution as the 27" LED Cinema Display (2,540 x 1,920), only in 9.7".

Please Apple, give me a reason to buy iPad 2, impress me. But a display upgrade like that in 12 months? Come on everyone, you ask too much. The cost must be incredible!

By the way, I do think the iPad resolution will double, but truly double. In other words, go from 786,432 (1,024 * 768) pixels on a 9.7" screen to 1,572,864 pixels on a 9.7" screen. This means a screen resolution of approximately 1,448 x 1,086 should be expected.

Thanks for reading my first post!:apple:
Click to expand...

Great Post!! Best I've read this evening! (UK)
 
Stang68 said:
Oh my god who cares? Either way the screen will be nice! Lol
Click to expand...

Wow.

There I was scrolling the the comments with red wine in one hand and mouse in the thinking "man I would like that on the iPad 2 but maybe I can hold out for the iPad 3..." and BAM! I see your comment.

It is so true.

This really is a case of rumour hype that in the grand scheme of things really doesn't matter as much as it seems.

Double the res would be nice but how about double the GPU, RAM andCPU capabilities first eh? When the iPad came out so many reviews were saying "and the screen is so sharp and beautiful..."


Its been what... 50 weeks or something since those reviews... The current screen res is no big deal till at least 2012 surely? Don't get me wrong i'd take a retina iPad screen tmr but this feels desperate to me
 
LorengeU2 said:
So this discussion of the Retina Display coming to iPad is really ridiculous. First read below the description of the Retina Display as quoted from Jobs (found in MacRumors article, "Apple Announces iPhone 4 with Retina Display, HD Video Recording, More"):

"iPhone 4 will also have a Retina Display, a new display technology that packs in 326 pixels per inch, compared to the current iPhone's 163 ppi. Noting that the detection limit of the human eye is 300 ppi"

The "detection limit of the human eye is 300 ppi". This means that at any distance the human eye can see a maximum of 300 ppi. If the iPad were to double its resolution to 2048 x 1536 it would come nowhere near the resolution required to be a Retina Display.

The current display is 132 ppi and 1024 x 768 with a 9.7" diagonal. 1024/132 = 7.758 (the height in inches of the iPad screen). 768/132 = 5.818 (the width in inches of the iPad screen). At 300 ppi (the Retina Display minimum ppi) the iPad display would have to be 2,328 (7.758 * 300) x 1,745 (5.818 * 300) in resolution to be considered a Retina Display. Additionally, if the iPhone and iPod touch screens are being manufactured at 326 ppi, it stands to reason the iPad Retina Display would come in at the same ppi. This means the iPad Retina Display would most likely be a resolution of 2,529 x 1,897.

First off, that is much higher than the rumored 2048 x 1536. Secondly, do you know what other displays that is higher than... essentially everyone that Apple has ever made. The screen would be the same resolution as the 27" LED Cinema Display (2,540 x 1,920), only in 9.7".

Please Apple, give me a reason to buy iPad 2, impress me. But a display upgrade like that in 12 months? Come on everyone, you ask too much. The cost must be incredible!

By the way, I do think the iPad resolution will double, but truly double. In other words, go from 786,432 (1,024 * 768) pixels on a 9.7" screen to 1,572,864 pixels on a 9.7" screen. This means a screen resolution of approximately 1,448 x 1,086 should be expected.

Thanks for reading my first post!:apple:
Click to expand...



Do you not think 'retina' is not relative to the distance your actual retina is from the screen?

Phones are typically held at the same sort of distance from eyes as a Gameboy (arms fairly bent).

iPads are held at similar distances to laptops (arms slightly bent).

Assuming your eyes are still in their sockets... + ....and that you don't have the eye sight of a hungry owl...

Then you still have what the marketing dept could still call a 'retina' device, no?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back