Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
C'mon folks. Everyone knows that Jobs' forte is his world-renowned reality distortion field.

So I'm right then, it is foolish to treat the keynote address like a set of technical promises and then fault Apple for not adhering to one's own misinterpretation. Glad we agree.

I would [post a thread comparing the current iPod screen to the previous gen], if I wanted to. This thread speaks for itself - "Don't expect to be blown away by the quality of the retina display on the iPod 4." and that's exactly what it is.

The point is you said there was no incentive for screens to get better if people didn't do comparisons. I think comparing the current screen to the previous one is a good comparison, since it shows the product is improving. Comparing it to the iPhone might be technically interesting, but I'm not sure what the point is. Should someone who wants an iPod now not get one? 'Okay, I've moderated my expectations to not be 'blown away' by the Retina Display. Whew, thanks dudes.'

And to say the Retina Display is decent, but 'nothing special either' - in comparison to what? In comparison to that other device with the same functionality, app system, and price? I don't remember hearing about that product.
 
I've compared my iPhone 4 to the iPod touch 4th Gen, and there is a slight difference in overall quality of the display (contrast ratio, different colour tone, viewing angle).

However, it's still a brilliant step up from the previous iPod touch, so iPod touch buyers will not notice anything but a substantial increase in the quality of the display.
 
I would have thought that if you are such a movie aficionado that the discrepancy in black levels is significant to you, then the iPod Touch wouldn't even be in your consideration as something to watch movies on. I guess I stand corrected. The same goes for watching movies in a group: if doing so was important to me, I wouldn't bother with an iPhone, iPod Touch, or any other handheld device, no matter how good (even hypothetically) the screen was.

Yea, no need to get hostile. I only said that it DOES matter to me, but I'm glad it doesn't for you. That's fine.

It was a big issue I had with my iPhone 3G and the way it handled blacks. Any time I watched a movie all the dark scenes were hardly discernible. The only difference between the displays on the new iPod Touch and my iPhone 3G is the pixel density. That is not such a big deal since the viewing distance I use is moderate and I don't plan to be reading much small text on an iPod since my phone has a large high res screen.

I'll still check it out at the Apple Store though. The only reason I'm hesitant is I know I'll have limited use for it but every time I walk into one of those stores I want to buy everything! Haha.
 
The proper title for this thread should be "Discontented individual armchairs judgments about a display without ever seeing it. Don't be like this person."
I've seen it and compared to iPod touch second gen and iPhone4. Much worse than iPhone's screen, no change in quality compared to touch second gen (aside from resolution of course), not to mention much more visible fingerprints and smudges (for the reason I couldn't find, perhaps different glass coating, or whatever), but that's a little offtopic here.

Of course, you can disagree. I've noticed people who spend their money on new Apple product tend to be overhyped about it, rejecting any bad comments. That's fine to me, I have enough people's comments in this thread, only confirming exactly my point of view on the new iPod's screen agenda.
 
I've seen it and compared to iPod touch second gen and iPhone4. Much worse than iPhone's screen, no change in quality compared to touch second gen (aside from resolution of course), not to mention much more visible fingerprints and smudges (for the reason I couldn't find, perhaps different glass coating, or whatever), but that's a little offtopic here.

Of course, you can disagree. I've noticed people who spend their money on new Apple product tend to be overhyped about it, rejecting any bad comments. That's fine to me, I have enough people's comments in this thread, only confirming exactly my point of view on the new iPod's screen agenda.

The text I bolded points out that you have zero credibility for discussing the touch. The touch screen is NOT "much worse" than the iphone's screen. If you think so, I believe you'll have very few people who could agree with your sentiments.
 
I've seen it and compared to iPod touch second gen and iPhone4. Much worse than iPhone's screen, no change in quality compared to touch second gen (aside from resolution of course), not to mention much more visible fingerprints and smudges (for the reason I couldn't find, perhaps different glass coating, or whatever), but that's a little offtopic here.

Of course, you can disagree. I've noticed people who spend their money on new Apple product tend to be overhyped about it, rejecting any bad comments. That's fine to me, I have enough people's comments in this thread, only confirming exactly my point of view on the new iPod's screen agenda.

My apologies. I see the OP is in timeout right now and thought you were that person, but my comment still stands with respect to that individual, just not you.

I don't see the "much worse"-ness myself at ALL, having seen all the same screens you have, more in fact (iPhone 4, iPod Touch 4G, iPad, and an iPod Touch 2G). I really thought the difference was night and day between the Touch 2G and the 4G on almost any measure (my dissatisfaction with the original Touch displays was a major reason I never bought an earlier Touch), but really for the $, I was expecting the iPhone 4 screen to stand out a little bit more. Outside of black level, I just don't see the big iPhone 4 advantage. Sure, viewing angles are better, but by the time you get out to the angles where you notice differences, it's getting hard to read anyway.

Photos, movies, web sites (especially web sites, the touch is finally a viable general use web browsing platform IMO), even games look a good deal better on the 4G screen than the 2G.

The iPad screen, I'm kind of meh about. It's nice, but for an IPS display, I would expect it to be a little more vibrant than the one I've used a decent amount. I wasn't wowed by its viewing angle either.
 
The point is you said there was no incentive for screens to get better if people didn't do comparisons. I think comparing the current screen to the previous one is a good comparison, since it shows the product is improving. Comparing it to the iPhone might be technically interesting, but I'm not sure what the point is. Should someone who wants an iPod now not get one? 'Okay, I've moderated my expectations to not be 'blown away' by the Retina Display. Whew, thanks dudes.'
No, my point was to oppose to many people's comments stating there's no difference at all or difference only in viewing angles. That's an abvious lie, and it was the main reason I defend truth here, presented a decend screen comparison in my opinion (page 11 in this thread), along with many other people who share the same point of view. I'm sorry, but "it's only viewing angles" crap is/was repeated too many times on this forum. It has nothing to do with choosing a product, liking it's display quality or not, or whatever. It's about the facts, and the facts are that TN is much different than IPS, almost in anything you can imagine as it comes to quality of LCD.
 
No, my point was to oppose to many people's comments stating there's no difference at all or difference only in viewing angles. That's an abvious lie, and it was the main reason I defend truth here, presented a decend screen comparison in my opinion (page 11 in this thread), along with many other people who share the same point of view. I'm sorry, but "it's only viewing angles" crap is/was repeated too many times on this forum. It has nothing to do with choosing a product, liking it's display quality or not, or whatever. It's about the facts, and the facts are that TN is much different than IPS, almost in anything you can imagine as it comes to quality of LCD.

Ok, so there's a factual difference between the two screens. You've put a lot of energy into defending this, but since you say it has nothing to do with choosing a product, or liking the display quality or not, who cares? My opinion on the iPod Touch hasn't changed at all knowing these facts about iPod/iPhone differences, since I'm not trying to decide between buying an iPod or an iPhone. I don't think the facts you've presented will change anybody's behavior, not because they deny the truth of those facts, but because those facts are irrelevant. It's like telling someone who wants a Civic to get around in that the engine in a Maserati is better than that in a Civic. So what? For what they're doing, the differences don't make any difference at all.

And of course, the claims you've made that the display is 'crap' or 'much worse' compared to the iPhone are not factual, they're evaluative, and they're not shared by many people.
 
There is really no difference besides viewing angles

The viewing angles are really disappointing. Even the most minute change in viewing angle, such as what may occur when tapping the screen without concentrating on keeping the device absolutely still, causes variation in brightness. On a largely white or light-colored page, like a typical web page, this can look like flicker. I don't recall this issue with my Zune HD, and it's one of the few things I liked better about it.
 
The viewing angles are really disappointing. Even the most minute change in viewing angle, such as what may occur when tapping the screen without concentrating on keeping the device absolutely still, causes variation in brightness. On a largely white or light-colored page, like a typical web page, this can look like flicker. I don't recall this issue with my Zune HD, and it's one of the few things I liked better about it.

I'm not having that problem at all.
 
I'm not having that problem at all.

Maybe you've got the one Touch that doesn't have poor viewing angles. :rolleyes: Maybe you're using a very low backlight level, where it's not as noticeable (I'm guessing it wouldn't be). Maybe you're making your observations in ambient lighting conditions where it's not as noticeable. Maybe you're looking at the home screen where it's not as apparent, which to me is a major flaw in the several Youtube videos I've seen that purport to examine the display. Maybe you just don't notice things like this as much as others. Whatever the case, every Touch I've seen including the ~ 10 on display at the local Apple Store had the poor viewing angles with extreme sensitivity to minute changes in viewing angle. It seems to be inherent to the display they've chosen.
 
The viewing angles are really disappointing. Even the most minute change in viewing angle, such as what may occur when tapping the screen without concentrating on keeping the device absolutely still, causes variation in brightness. On a largely white or light-colored page, like a typical web page, this can look like flicker. I don't recall this issue with my Zune HD, and it's one of the few things I liked better about it.

are u serious??? Have you got a special (and very DEFECTIVE) touch?? e
 
jon3543 said:
The viewing angles are really disappointing. Even the most minute change in viewing angle, such as what may occur when tapping the screen without concentrating on keeping the device absolutely still, causes variation in brightness. On a largely white or light-colored page, like a typical web page, this can look like flicker. I don't recall this issue with my Zune HD, and it's one of the few things I liked better about it.

Ironically, display flicker was a common complaint for Zune HD's. Supposedly, Microsoft even (supposedly) acknowledged it as a problem with the OLED screen. (See comments)

Maybe you've got the one Touch that doesn't have poor viewing angles. :rolleyes: Maybe you're using a very low backlight level, where it's not as noticeable (I'm guessing it wouldn't be). Maybe you're making your observations in ambient lighting conditions where it's not as noticeable. Maybe you're looking at the home screen where it's not as apparent, which to me is a major flaw in the several Youtube videos I've seen that purport to examine the display. Maybe you just don't notice things like this as much as others. Whatever the case, every Touch I've seen including the ~ 10 on display at the local Apple Store had the poor viewing angles with extreme sensitivity to minute changes in viewing angle. It seems to be inherent to the display they've chosen.

Are you talking about backlights being directional? That's the only thing I can think that you're talking about. That's kind of an effect of, well, having backlit portable displays. I don't notice it if I'm just holding and using it normally. I really find it hard to believe you're seeing it in a brightly lit Apple store, especially manifested as anything approaching "flicker." :confused:
 
Ironically, display flicker was a common complaint for Zune HD's. Supposedly, Microsoft even (supposedly) acknowledged it as a problem with the OLED screen. (See comments)

Oh please. :rolleyes: It's not ironic in the slightest because it's utterly dissimilar. The Zune HD flicker was true flicker (actually, more of a "scrolling lines of lower luminance" as I recall it) that occurred under complete different conditions. Like most others, I only noticed it when transferring data, i.e. while loading web pages, and it could be all but eliminated by increasing the backlight level, which I would have done anyway. IOW, it was completely unlike what I described for the iPod Touch, which I said "can look like flicker" when inadvertently causing the device to move in space when tapping the screen. The Zune HD display has much, much, much better viewing angles than the Touch. I do not recall ever thinking, "Gee these viewing angles suck!" in the 11 months I owned my Zune HD, but it's something I noticed immediately with the Touch and I continue to notice on an ongoing basis with the Touch. I decided I can live with it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't suck, because it does. Love the Retina display resolution, and the colors look fine, though. Also, the Touch has yet to let me down on gapless playback, I can create and EDIT playlists on the Touch, iTunes 10 is much faster so far than the Zune software on my large collection, iTunes hasn't yet silently updated hidden metadata, wrecking last-modified dates and forcing larger backups, and iTunes hasn't stupidly married itself to Windows 7 "Libraries". Those are the main reasons I dumped Zune forever and bought my first Apple product since 1994, which, ironically (for real, as we're talking about display issues), was a 17" Apple-branded Trinitron monitor I used with my PCs for the next few years. For these benefits, I can live with the Touch's poor viewing angles. Hopefully they'll fix it next year, and I'll sell it to someone who cares even less about the viewing angles.

Are you talking about backlights being directional? That's the only thing I can think that you're talking about. That's kind of an effect of, well, having backlit portable displays. I don't notice it if I'm just holding and using it normally. I really find it hard to believe you're seeing it in a brightly lit Apple store, especially manifested as anything approaching "flicker." :confused:

I'm sure I attracted some attention as I shielded the Touch with my dark clothing and body. But that's OK. :D Please note also that I didn't say I saw something resembling flicker in the Apple Store. What I said was, "Whatever the case, every Touch I've seen including the ~ 10 on display at the local Apple Store had the poor viewing angles with extreme sensitivity to minute changes in viewing angle." And that's a fact. As someone who bought a spare NEC 20WMGX2 monitor in mid-2007 when it became clear monitor manufacturers were moving en masse to cheap TN panels for the then-foreseeable future, viewing angle is something I take seriously, and I'm amused I'm being challenged to this extent concerning what I described for the Touch. But hey, I've never heard even a remotely silent refrigerator either, or a quiet stock Nvidia card with a fan, etc. There's no shortage of people who say they have, though. :p No doubt it's the same with display issues.

Please try to read and respond more carefully. You perceived irony where there was none, and you've tried to put words in my mouth. If I were to reply to myself, I would sarcastically say, "Did you really expect any different?" :D
 
the more i use my ipod the more I love the screen. I'm even reading some Scott Pilgrim comics on it and the dpi is amazing, everything's so sharp. I had a zuneHD and I did love it, the screen flicker was an issue I noticed.. but anyway I'll take the resolution of the screen over a higher quality panel if it just means sacrificing viewing angles and blacks.
 
Oh please. :rolleyes: It's not ironic in the slightest because it's utterly dissimilar. The Zune HD flicker was true flicker (actually, more of a "scrolling lines of lower luminance" as I recall it) that occurred under complete different conditions. Like most others, I only noticed it when transferring data, i.e. while loading web pages, and it could be all but eliminated by increasing the backlight level, which I would have done anyway.

So, um...yeah, the Zune HD screen actually flickers in some circumstances. That was my point. And yes, it is ironic to say you preferred the display of another device, one that had/has a pretty widely perceived flicker issue, compared with another device where you're the only person on this longish thread that's described it having that sort of phenomenon. ;)

IOW, it was completely unlike what I described for the iPod Touch, which I said "can look like flicker" when inadvertently causing the device to move in space when tapping the screen. The Zune HD display has much, much, much better viewing angles than the Touch. I do not recall ever thinking, "Gee these viewing angles suck!" in the 11 months I owned my Zune HD, but it's something I noticed immediately with the Touch and I continue to notice on an ongoing basis with the Touch. I decided I can live with it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't suck, because it does.

If the screen/device is moving around appreciably due to the action of pressing on it (enough to create the appearance of flicker to you), use a lighter touch. Really. You barely need any contact at all. The lighter the touch, the more accurate I manage to be with it.

I still don't experience the level of viewing angle sensitivity you do, even in a completely dark room. Do all TN displays seem to shimmer or flicker to you if you move a little? Genuinely curious. As best as I can figure, you're describing the backlight shining directly on your eye or eyes and then not, creating "flicker." The best way I can check this is, does the new Nano screen drive you absolutely nuts? Because it has a smaller screen and backlight yet that would be even more directional and sensitive to its position moving relative to you.
 
I would, if I wanted to. This thread speaks for itself - "Don't expect to be blown away by the quality of the retina display on the iPod 4." and that's exactly what it is. An ok screen, no failures, no negative blacks, but nothing special either, exept for higher resolution. I bet Apple's gonna put an IPS display in the touch 5gen, and then most of you guys gonna say "wow, what a difference to previous gen!". But we have to wait to see that, an I'm sure I will be smiling :)


Then the Iphone 4GS comes out with an even more improved screen lol. FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!!!!
 
The display quality on this new iPod touch is amazing. I'm getting the same crisp text experience I was getting on the iPhone 4. I used to get eye strain reading things on the Touch 3rd gen. I no longer get it on the 4th gen. I could never go back to a 3rd gen, and it's mostly because of the improved resolution of the Retina Display.
 
If anybody noticed, the thread started on this premise:

1) the iPod Touch's screen is not as nice as the iPhone 4 screen since it's not IPS
2) if it's not as nice as the iPhone 4, the screen cannot be all that good
3) Thus the screen won't blow you away with the quality

I have no problem with #1, which is completely true, but it's a very clear logical mistake made by the thread starter and many other here on the 2nd point: just because its black level and viewing angle aren't good, that doesn't mean its impressive resolution and pretty decent brightness won't impress the users. Some probably won't be wowed just as I'm very unimpressed by all the AMOLED screens I've seen and used, but the thread started with an erroneous premise and it'll keep going this way:

Person A: "I really love the iPod Touch display!"
Person B: "It can't be good since it's not IPS!"
Person A: "It still looks really nice"
Person B: "No it's not IPS, it cannot be good at all"
Person A: "It really does look nice to eyes, I'm using it"
Person B: "No if it's not IPS, no good."

Repeat ad-nauseum.
 
If anybody noticed, the thread started on this premise:

1) the iPod Touch's screen is not as nice as the iPhone 4 screen since it's not IPS
2) if it's not as nice as the iPhone 4, the screen cannot be all that good
3) Thus the screen won't blow you away with the quality

I have no problem with #1, which is completely true, but it's a very clear logical mistake made by the thread starter and many other here on the 2nd point: just because its black level and viewing angle aren't good, that doesn't mean its impressive resolution and pretty decent brightness won't impress the users. Some probably won't be wowed just as I'm very unimpressed by all the AMOLED screens I've seen and used, but the thread started with an erroneous premise and it'll keep going this way:

Person A: "I really love the iPod Touch display!"
Person B: "It can't be good since it's not IPS!"
Person A: "It still looks really nice"
Person B: "No it's not IPS, it cannot be good at all"
Person A: "It really does look nice to eyes, I'm using it"
Person B: "No if it's not IPS, no good."

Repeat ad-nauseum.

I agree. Take this as a person who has NEVER used an iPhone 4, but has owned all previous generations of the iPod Touch. The screen difference to me is amazing. When I received my iPod Touch last week, it was definitely noticable.

Being used to the Retina display on the 4G, I went back last night and put my 4G next to my 3G and now it really stands out! The clarity of the new screen is definitely more apparent to me now. Even the color range and contrast seems better because of the smoother blending between pixels.

Based on the pictures I've seen between the iPhone 4 and the iPod Touch 4G, I will agree, IPS is better. HOWEVER, I'm not an iPhone 4 owner/user and within the iPod Touch product line, the difference is amazing and definitely noticable when compared against one another.
 
Holy smokes! Now that i actually own the new ipod, i must say comparing it to the 2g, the retina display blows my mind!:D
 
So here's this marvelous little machine that does just about everything except make phone calls and is an absolute wonder.

However, it's screen isn't as good as an iPhone 4. I guess I'll smash it with a brick and go back to using my 3rd Gen.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.