iPad 2 resolution will stay the same

[toke lahti]

Why would you want to run old iPhone apps? When there 50 000 native iPad apps.

If retina-iPad comes, there won't be instantly 50,000 apps for its native resolution.

iPhone apps do not run fullscreen on iPad. They either run without zoom at 480x320 or with 2x zoom (nearest neighbor) at 960x640.

Good to know, I thought they were fullscreen like was said back then:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/27/ipad/
:"According to Apple's iPhone software guru, Scott Forstall, the iPad will run "virtually all" iPhone software "virtually unmodified," either in an iPhone-sized area in the center of the iPad's display or blown up to fit the display."

 

[Stetrain]

If retina-iPad comes, there won't be instantly 50,000 apps for its native resolution.

Good to know, I thought they were fullscreen like was said back then:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/27/ipad/
:"According to Apple's iPhone software guru, Scott Forstall, the iPad will run "virtually all" iPhone software "virtually unmodified," either in an iPhone-sized area in the center of the iPad's display or blown up to fit the display."

I think that what was meant by that was "blown up to more closely fit the display".

Still though the iPad (without jailbreaking) does not display retina display (960x640) capable iPhone apps at 960x640. They are displayed at either 320x480 or pixel-doubled 320x480, so that they occupy 960x640 pixels but are blocky and low resolution.

 

[Sean Dempsey]

Come on people, a freaking ipad is not going to have a higher resolution than the 17" Macbook Pro and damn near the resolution of a 27" cinema display.

Get real.

 

[samiznaetekto]

Come on people, a freaking ipad is not going to have a higher resolution than the 17" Macbook Pro and damn near the resolution of a 27" cinema display.

Get real.

LOL. Filed for future claim chowder.

 

[JeffDM]

If retina-iPad comes, there won't be instantly 50,000 apps for its native resolution.

No, not instantly, but not for long either. Most iPhone apps that I used were updated to "Retina" within a few weeks after the iPhone 4 release.

 

[Sean Dempsey]

LOL. Filed for future claim chowder.

Take a moment to look at the attached image in full size. You really think that a ipad will have the graphics power, ram, and developer support to show a display at such a massive resolution?

Pixel "doubling" is actually pixel-quadding. You're increasing every pixel by 4x.

Seriously, why would apple have a ipad screen that's the same resolution as the 27" display? People will take higher pixel density over raw size, why not have a 5000x3000 20" retina monitor?

It doesn't make sense, and it won't happen. Quote this post please so when I'm right, I can come back and gloat.

 

[Bytor65]

If retina-iPad comes, there won't be instantly 50,000 apps for its native resolution.

But iPad scaling of iPhone apps is a bad example.

We are assuming when iPad 3 (or iPad 4) gets its 2x resolution screen, it will be a perfect double just like iPhone, so iP3->iP4 is a much better example of what this upgrade will be like.

Take a moment to look at the attached image in full size. You really think that a ipad will have the graphics power, ram, and developer support to show a display at such a massive resolution?

I totally agree, iPad2 will be staying at 1024x768, but I think your example would be more dramatic in a landscape mode. In this mode many people will still have monitor wider than the image. In landscape it dwarfs all the dimensions of most desktop monitors.

 

[JeffDM]

Take a moment to look at the attached image in full size. You really think that a ipad will have the graphics power, ram, and developer support to show a display at such a massive resolution?

Pixel "doubling" is actually pixel-quadding. You're increasing every pixel by 4x.

Seriously, why would apple have a ipad screen that's the same resolution as the 27" display? People will take higher pixel density over raw size, why not have a 5000x3000 20" retina monitor?

It doesn't make sense, and it won't happen. Quote this post please so when I'm right, I can come back and gloat.

I don't think it makes any sense to make such a rigid stand either way. I'm leaning that it's not going to happen this year, but I won't rule it out completely. One reason desktops don't usually have high density is because no one has finished resolution independence. Apple solved that pretty well on iPhone 4 because they use a very limited set of resolutions, resolution independence is generally more arbitrary. As it is, integrated graphics chips in a laptop can operate a 27" monitor as well as the monitor built into the computer.

 

[fertilized-egg]

Take a moment to look at the attached image in full size. You really think that a ipad will have the graphics power, ram, and developer support to show a display at such a massive resolution?

i'd think graphics power will be no problem unless you want full-blown 3D games. Ancient graphics cards drive Windows 7 at full HD resolution just fine. The biggest problem here will be the cost of the display and the potential impact on games, most apps should be fine and developers always have the option for sticking with the old resolution.

 

[Bytor65]

i'd think graphics power will be no problem unless you want full-blown 3D games. Ancient graphics cards drive Windows 7 at full HD resolution just fine.

Windows applications aren't expected to offer liquid smooth pan an zoom at a touch.

Doing that with 3MP display is going to require more graphics power.

 

[DeathChill]

Isn't the PSP2 using the same graphics chip as the iPad 2 is rumoured to be using (though the iPad 2 is rumoured to be dual core and the PSP2 quad)? They're trying to claim it's as powerful as the PS3.

 

[Sean Dempsey]

Here's a landscape version.

People keep saying "doubling." It's not doubling, it's squaring. As in, four times the pixels, not double.

View this image full size. The ipad2 would need a pretty serious processor and GPU upgrade to be able to do anything fluid with a resolution that size. This is a exponential increase, so who knows what sort of power will be squared or cubed.

For all we know, squaring the pixel size cubes the processing power. We all know the cubed-squared law won't allow for Giant Ants, and it probably won't allow for a squaring of the ipad display.

 

[Krandor]

Seriously, why would apple have a ipad screen that's the same resolution as the 27" display? People will take higher pixel density over raw size, why not have a 5000x3000 20" retina monitor?
.

Why? Because Apple's money these days is in the ipad not the macbook.

People very often go for bigger screens over higher pixel density.

 

[GnillGnoll]

Take a moment to look at the attached image in full size. You really think that a ipad will have the graphics power, ram, and developer support to show a display at such a massive resolution?

I'm pretty sure the answer would be yes to all three questions unless you're talking about demanding 3D games. Cost and manufacturing capacity are the real limiting factors.

Pixel "doubling" is actually pixel-quadding. You're increasing every pixel by 4x.

True, but "pixel doubling" is an established term for it.

It doesn't make sense, and it won't happen.

It will happen, the question is "when?" If not this year then next year. And desktop monitors will follow, they'll just take a bit longer as they're more expensive and the software isn't quite ready yet.

 

[samiznaetekto]

Take a moment to look at the attached image in full size. You really think that a ipad will have the graphics power, ram, and developer support to show a display at such a massive resolution?

Do you own an MBA 11.6"? If you don't, go to the store and hold it in your hands. Now imagine that keyboard and trackpad are removed, hinges and fans are removed, extra bezel around display is trimmed, extra ports are removed, extra aluminum that forms the surface on which your palms rest and keyboard attached to, is removed, and the whole bottom alumunum cover is removed, and a tablet is made out of the rest.

It'll be just like iPad in size and weight!

And yet, this puppy has the guts to drive BOTH 2560x1600 resolution on external display and 1366x768 on internal. That's a total of 5.15MP!

So why you think iPad 2 cannot have power to drive 2048x1536? (3.15MP)

And if tiny MBA can work 5 hours on an off the shelf CPU and GPU, why can't iPad 2 work 10 hours on a dedicated ultra-low TDP CPU and GPU while pushing only 60% of total pixels of MBA?

Seriously, why would apple have a ipad screen that's the same resolution as the 27" display? People will take higher pixel density over raw size, why not have a 5000x3000 20" retina monitor?

It seems, only you in the world want to use such a monitor. On a 5000x3000 20" retina monitor Apple menu (22 pixels high) will be 1.9mm high (0.087mm pixel pitch * 22), or 1/13th of an inch. Most of UI elements will be incredibly tiny. You'll need a good watchmaker's loupe to see anything on this monitor. Monitor like this will be totally unusable in such resolution-dependent OS like OS X. On iPad 2, however, doubling the pixel density does not make UI elements unusably smaller, they stay the same size, just much much sharper.

 

[Sean Dempsey]

Do you own an MBA 11.6"? If you don't, go to the store and hold it in your hands. Now imagine that keyboard and trackpad are removed, hinges and fans are removed, extra bezel around display is trimmed, extra ports are removed, extra aluminum that forms the surface on which your palms rest and keyboard attached to, is removed, and the whole bottom alumunum cover is removed, and a tablet is made out of the rest.

It'll be just like iPad in size and weight!

And yet, this puppy has the guts to drive BOTH 2560x1600 resolution on external display and 1366x768 on internal. That's a total of 5.15MP!

So why you think iPad 2 cannot have power to drive 2048x1536? (3.15MP)

And if tiny MBA can work 5 hours on an off the shelf CPU and GPU, why can't iPad 2 work 10 hours on a dedicated ultra-low TDP CPU and GPU while pushing only 60% of total pixels of MBA?



It seems, only you in the world want to use such a monitor. On a 5000x3000 20" retina monitor Apple menu (22 pixels high) will be 1.9mm high (0.087mm pixel pitch * 22), or 1/13th of an inch. Most of UI elements will be incredibly tiny. You'll need a good watchmaker's loupe to see anything on this monitor. Monitor like this will be totally unusable in such resolution-dependent OS like OS X. On iPad 2, however, doubling the pixel density does not make UI elements unusably smaller, they stay the same size, just much much sharper.

So you're saying the Macbook Air has the same processing power, ram, and GPU power as an iPad?

 

[samiznaetekto]

So you're saying the Macbook Air has the same processing power, ram, and GPU power as an iPad?

Did you read my post? Which of the following points you disagree with?

- MBA 11.6" can drive 5+ megapixels at the same time
- MBA 11.6" has size and total volume of its components (sans keyboard, touchpad, hinges, fans, and extra structure) about the same as iPad
- desktop Retina displays will be unusable until resolution-independent OS's become mainstream

?

 

[LoganT]

Can I just ask, why is "iPad 2 resolution will stay the same" said with a smile?

 

[Eso]

People keep saying "doubling." It's not doubling, it's squaring.

Resolution is measured in length, not area. That's why you can separately refer to horizontal and vertical resolution (there's no such thing as a horizontal area). For every horizontal row, you double the pixels and it's twice as long. Same thing for the vertical.

 

[Stetrain]

Resolution is measured in length, not area. That's why you can separately refer to horizontal and vertical resolution (there's no such thing as a horizontal area). For every horizontal row, you double the pixels and it's twice as long. Same thing for the vertical.

Also if you take resolution as DPI, what's being talked about is a doubling of the DPI. What's quadrupling is the number of pixels.

 

[Bytor65]

Did you read my post? Which of the following points you disagree with?

- MBA 11.6" can drive 5+ megapixels at the same time

And what is it doing with those 5+ MP? I bet you aren't doing 5MP liquid smooth pan/zooms.

Displaying a static desktop is not the same as graphics power needed to actually do smooth pan/zoom that you would need on a tablet.

iPad 2 is 1024x768. Get used to it.

 

[Carouser]

And yet, this puppy has the guts to drive BOTH 2560x1600 resolution on external display and 1366x768 on internal. That's a total of 5.15MP!

So why you think iPad 2 cannot have power to drive 2048x1536? (3.15MP)

And if tiny MBA can work 5 hours on an off the shelf CPU and GPU, why can't iPad 2 work 10 hours on a dedicated ultra-low TDP CPU and GPU while pushing only 60% of total pixels of MBA?

Yes, perhaps it's technically possible. Apple could do this and more, if they completely ignore the cost. The fact that it's hypothetically possible is irrelevant. Do you think they can squeeze all the hardware from the MBA into a smaller shape (the iPad is well smaller than the MBA), while keeping the price of the iPad the same? The MBA costs twice what an iPad does.

 

[Irishman]

I would say 50/50.
I believe little bit more than this author does. However, if iPad gets retina display, then I am buying it on Day 1. But, I agree with him about retina display. It is too early for apple to update so fast.


Double the Resolution
More Ram
Faster Prcoessor
More Storage
Front and back Camera
Sd card slot
Mini Display port.

That is a lot of upgrade in 1 year and I really doubt apple will do this.

We shall see, but only feature I am interested in is retina display, not camera. Facetime is not a big deal to me yet.

I dunno. At this point, most people who want an iPad have bought one, so they've got to do something to continue to drive public desire for it. Plus, last year, they were selling it in a vacuum of competition. Now, Samsung has just dropped the Galaxy Tab to $299, and the Playbook is set to be out this year running Honeycomb, and other assorted competitors will be waiting in the wings to chip away at Apple's market share of this new product category.

So, count me in the group that says Apple will do more upgrade in 1 year than less.

 

[samiznaetekto]

Yes, perhaps it's technically possible. Apple could do this and more, if they completely ignore the cost. The fact that it's hypothetically possible is irrelevant. Do you think they can squeeze all the hardware from the MBA into a smaller shape (the iPad is well smaller than the MBA), while keeping the price of the iPad the same? The MBA costs twice what an iPad does.

What makes you think that hardware from MBA won't fit in iPad? Do you own or at least put your hand on MBA 11? (I'm typing this on it ) If you remove keyboard, touchpad, ALL of the aluminum shell of the bottom half, ports, fans, hinges, and reduce the screen from 11.6 to 9.7... what will be left? Almost NOTHING It'll probably fit in iPhone But it's no question it'll fit in iPad 2. Especially that it has flatter profile than iPad 1, so probably even more internal volume.

What makes you think that Apple won't offer iPad 2 as a "high-end iPad" alongside with (slightly reduced in price) iPad 1?

MBA 11.6" 1.4GHz 2GB/64GB = $999
Compared to iPad 64GB WiFi @ $699, the $300 difference includes faster 2-core processor, 8x the RAM (2GB vs 256MB), GPU capable of driving 6.5x more pixels (5.15MP vs. 0.8), larger display, built-in keyboard, glass touchpad, 2 USB ports, DisplayPort, web camera. Not too shabby.

So why can't iPad 2 with 2048x1536 resolution be priced at, say, $899 for 64GB, $799 for 32GB, $699 for 16GB, alongside with iPad 1 at $599 for 64GB, $499 for 32GB, and $399 for 16GB?

Can you answer all these questions?

 

[samiznaetekto]

And what is it doing with those 5+ MP? I bet you aren't doing 5MP liquid smooth pan/zooms.

Displaying a static desktop is not the same as graphics power needed to actually do smooth pan/zoom that you would need on a tablet.

Can you read post #5 in this thread?

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1064575/

Do you think Apple will post MBA's spec as "Simultaneously supports full native resolution on the built-in display and up to 2560 by 1600 pixels on an external display, both at millions of colors" if it was not capable of doing smooth pans/zooms at this resolution?

But you don't have to answer the last question, since I have 30" 2560x1600 monitor at home which I haven't tried yet with The Puppy (it's attached to 17" MBP) and as soon as I get home, I'll chain The Puppy to The 4MP Monster and report back.