I thought the iPad looked great until I got my iPhone 4. Now it doesn't look as good. Regardless, the iPad is still the best tablet offering. Maybe we'll get a better screen next year.
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.
Ipad 2 no retina display...... really ?
- Thread starter CZK
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I thought the iPad looked great until I got my iPhone 4. Now it doesn't look as good. Regardless, the iPad is still the best tablet offering. Maybe we'll get a better screen next year.
all apple products should have retina display and in a few years they will. just not in 2011.
No, they wont. Not everything should have retina display. Somethings don't need it. The iPhone needs it because you hold it close to your face...and I guess some people do the same with the ipad
Honestly, people, you just need something to complain about. Who freaking cares if your iPad looks dull compared to your iPhone 4? *Every* screen in existence will look dull compared to your iPhone 4.
The display on the iPad is already nearly top-of-the-line with a 132 ppi (I believe) which is as good as the 11" MBA with the sharp resolution. I'd rather Apple add features like better processing with the same battery life and cost, than them have a Retina display at the expense of battery, cost, and performance.
Would a Retina display be nice? Yeah, it'd be amazing. But really, it's not like it's a "I freaking need one" because the current display is probably better than the screen you're reading this on.
The display on the iPad is already nearly top-of-the-line with a 132 ppi (I believe) which is as good as the 11" MBA with the sharp resolution. I'd rather Apple add features like better processing with the same battery life and cost, than them have a Retina display at the expense of battery, cost, and performance.
Would a Retina display be nice? Yeah, it'd be amazing. But really, it's not like it's a "I freaking need one" because the current display is probably better than the screen you're reading this on.
You guys do realize that a 10" Retina display may not be feasible right now? Just because the iPhone 4 has it doesn't mean that the fabs can reliably fabricate a solid 9.7" screen on a fast and cheap scale that Apple needs. They have plans to ship 40m of iPad in just 2011 alone. The fabs are having a hard time just producing enough of the Retina displays for the iPhone.
Over time, it'll be possible to create 10" Retina display but not now. There are technologies to make it possible but that doesn't mean it's feasible to "mass-produce" it.
Even Samsung can't produce enough 4" AMOLED screen and they had to drop back to LCD.
Retina display isn't a specific technology, it's an overall term combining all of the latest technologies available. At this moment, there is no 9.7" Retina Display, just as there is no 13"/15"/17" high PPI displays for MBPs that sell for much higher prices than the iPad itself.
Over time, it'll be possible to create 10" Retina display but not now. There are technologies to make it possible but that doesn't mean it's feasible to "mass-produce" it.
Even Samsung can't produce enough 4" AMOLED screen and they had to drop back to LCD.
Retina display isn't a specific technology, it's an overall term combining all of the latest technologies available. At this moment, there is no 9.7" Retina Display, just as there is no 13"/15"/17" high PPI displays for MBPs that sell for much higher prices than the iPad itself.
Don't really get this whole stupid argument. The original iPad display was so ahead of the game that the HP Touchpad is using it in their unreleased tablet THIS year. The only "HD" tablet is the Xoom.
Yes, Apple could have used the retina display to get ahead of the game again, but then again, they now have the thinnest tablet out there which equals or beats all competitors in processing and graphics power, not to mention the large ecosystem with iTunes, the App Store, and 65k exclusive Apps. Retina tech costs bank and they need to stay ahead in the price game.
Specs do not make a tablet great on their own. Otherwise, the Xoom would be selling like hot cakes. Customers want the whole experience. iPad 2 provides the specs and the experience. It doesn't need a screen that would increase the cost by at least $100 per model just because no one else has it and one competitor can say "we have more pixels than the iPad simply due to the aspect ratio of our screen". The avg consumer, even power users DO NOT CARE. If the screen sucked, I get not buying it and waiting for retina, but THE SCREEN DOES NOT SUCK. It's not 2048x1536 but that's almost the same resolution as the 27 inch iMac. It's F\/cking absurd to need that high of a resolution on a 9.7 inch screen.
Truthfully they could have added 30dpi and called it retina because retina is relative to the distance from the users face.
Bottom line, it's not needed for a great tablet experience, it won't inhibit sales or the experience using the iPad, and a "double" resolution display would be ridiculous anyways.
I wouldn't think it would take much more GPU/CPU power than it does for the iPad 2 to stream out 1080p. Besides, it doesn't need to exactly be the same PPI as the iPhone 4. Just something close enough to make it appear as crisp and clear given another foot or so additional distance from my eyes. If that's the bar, then I'd say either they're lying and can't output real 1080p video and it's just faked 720, or that they're already there hardware wise.
So far as the cost of the actual screen itself, I haven't a clue. Though I would point out that the number of tablets currently supporting high resolutions isn't really relevant. How many phones were there before the iPhone 4? That didn't stop them then.
Yeah, but the iPad is held so the PPI needs to be a little higher. It doesn't have to be the same as the iPhone, but higher would help it look better.
But there is no doubt that it is already better than the competition.
Really dude!!!!I'm sure they could do a Retina dispaly right now and the Ipad would cost 1500.00... But they don't have labtop displays that is that good right now...
The tech isnt there right now to mass produce a retina display at 10" cheap enough... Please before you post ignorant dribble think a little bit.
I think we will see the Ipad 3 about this time next year.. It will have a quad core as that would save battery power... The retina display might have to wait until the ipad 4 coes out.. I would love to have it now but the cost to produce them at a 10" size might be to much for the next year or so.
Agreed ^
Do you have any sense how tough it would be to have retina display on a 9.7 INCH SCREEN?
Actually, it's probably also battery life, processor heat, and cost of a 9.7 screen at retina resolution.
Well you obviously do. Go ahead and to explain why the current hardware in iPad 2 couldn't handle a retina display. You know, just to put this to rest.
Stupid post. You don't know how apple iOS products work.
And stop saying retina display like it's at thing. The screen is beautiful. You don't news the same dpi as a iPhone. Because you hold it further away. Also the only way to get a new screen is to double te resolution of the current one.
So you rally think we will see 2000x1400 on a 10" display when the competing had 1280x800? Wake the **** up.
Apple can't use a random resolution. Because then we can't use iPad 1 apps. Doubling is fine though. Please stop making stupid treads when you have no knowledge of the subject. Atleast think for a second.
Also if they did make a super high res. It would drain the battery much faster. I don't want 3 hours battery life.
Also you can't mass produce 40m screens with that res.
Hell even samsung can't do 10m super amoled displays.
Use your brains guys.
And stop saying retina display like it's at thing. The screen is beautiful. You don't news the same dpi as a iPhone. Because you hold it further away. Also the only way to get a new screen is to double te resolution of the current one.
So you rally think we will see 2000x1400 on a 10" display when the competing had 1280x800? Wake the **** up.
Apple can't use a random resolution. Because then we can't use iPad 1 apps. Doubling is fine though. Please stop making stupid treads when you have no knowledge of the subject. Atleast think for a second.
Also if they did make a super high res. It would drain the battery much faster. I don't want 3 hours battery life.
Also you can't mass produce 40m screens with that res.
Hell even samsung can't do 10m super amoled displays.
Use your brains guys.
Last edited: