I suspect high DPI displays are currently expensive because not many are made. Apple can come along and order ten million, and the price will be similar -maybe a little higher - to the old panel.
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 Screen Likely to Have 2048x1536 resolution
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I suspect high DPI displays are currently expensive because not many are made. Apple can come along and order ten million, and the price will be similar -maybe a little higher - to the old panel.
There have been some compelling points for why we won't get the iPad Retina Display... the only thing I'll say for me personally is that a bump in resolution for reading text is the only way I'll shell out another $830 for a 64gb iPad + 3G
If the only addition this generation is bump CPU & GPU and the inevitable front and rear camera (which I personally have no interest in) and a slight body modification, - then I'll probably skip this generation altogether and look elsewhere for my 2011 gadget thrills (Prob go for a MacBook air when they are refreshed instead)...
Should they release this iPad with super high resolution, then I'd buy that day 1 no matter what...
Having read Kindle books on a galaxy tab 200dpi and iPhone 4 Retina Display, the text looks so much better, and as I read at least 1 book a week it's beginning to become a bug bear for me on the iPad at the moment.
If the only addition this generation is bump CPU & GPU and the inevitable front and rear camera (which I personally have no interest in) and a slight body modification, - then I'll probably skip this generation altogether and look elsewhere for my 2011 gadget thrills (Prob go for a MacBook air when they are refreshed instead)...
Should they release this iPad with super high resolution, then I'd buy that day 1 no matter what...
Having read Kindle books on a galaxy tab 200dpi and iPhone 4 Retina Display, the text looks so much better, and as I read at least 1 book a week it's beginning to become a bug bear for me on the iPad at the moment.
For as long as I can remember, computer screen resolution has been more often described as either Pixels Per Inch (PPI) or Dots Per Inch (DPI). The advantage to this is that it expressing the effect of pixel count and screen size with one number the can be easily compared with other similar numbers .
For example I can say "The iPhone 4 has a greater resolution at 330 PPI than does the rumored iPad 2 at 264 PPI" . Alternative, I could also say "The iPhone 4 with a screen size of 3.5 inches and a pixel count of 960-by-640 has a higher density of pixels than does the rumored iPad 2 with a screen size of 9.7 inches and a pixel count of 2048-by-1536"
Which makes more sense?
NO NEED TO SCREAM, WE CAN HEAR YOU JUST FINE!
And besides, you're acting as if you knew the absolute truth. So unless you work at Apple, you're speculating just like the others.
You do understand that is exactly what they're named, right? In fact here is the name of the bookmark ribbon: bookmark-ribbon-iPad@2x.png
Also, they removed it right after it was found. The same naming convention has happened with the wood background in iBooks: Wood Tile@2x.png
Boy, if only it were possible to read before posting.
Last edited:
Well the second one makes more sense, obviously.
Pixel density is not the same thing as "resolution". Resolution is typically used to refer to linear dimensions: a resolution of 800 by 600, a resolution of 1024 by 768 etc. The concept of pixel density is a much more recent concern - for years, computer screens were typically 72 ppi - a higher resolution usually went hand-in-hand with a larger screen size. What's at issue here is maintaining the screen size but doubling the pixel density (and hence having a screen with 4x the total number of pixels).
I love how people so quickly dismiss things that have evidence right in front of their face ... "oh anyone could have changed that to say iPadx2" but then are even quicker to buy into things that have NO evidence, like "horoscopes" and "God" hahaha...
I'm not saying this is definite, it just cracks me up what people let themselves blindly believe while they so easily dismiss things that CAN be backed up.
I'm not saying this is definite, it just cracks me up what people let themselves blindly believe while they so easily dismiss things that CAN be backed up.
You seem to know what you are talking about, I'm so excited for the 2048x1536 ipad2.
As an iPad/iPhone game dev who has already weighed in on this discussion last week in a different thread (see https://forums.macrumors.com/search/?searchid=22517339), I thought I'd jump in to provide a developers perspective on this that might be interesting to everyone in this discussion:
First off, let me say that if Apple does manage to pull off a 2048x1536 resolution (and pull it off properly), then the iPad 2 will without doubt be the most amazing gadget I've ever had my hands on, and I would be tremendously excited about the ideas of what you could do on such a platform.
That being said, I'm unforunately still very pessimistic about the odds of this actually happening.
First, it seems like a safe bet that the iPad 2 will be based on the PowerVR SGX 543 GPU (e.g. https://www.macrumors.com/2011/01/1...-opencl-capable-sgx543-gpu-in-future-devices/), which roughly doubles fillrate (from 500 megapixel to 1 gigapixel) while increasing poly throughput from 28 million to 35 million. I'm a developer and not a hardware guy, so I don't know if you could push those numbers much further with a multi-core configuration, but doubling the fillrate seems reasonable to me, and would give the iPad a much-needed push: It is certainly not the case, as people on here have suggested, that "geometry takes up 85% of the processing power and pixel pushing takes up the remaining 15%" - that may very well be the case for current-generation PC or console games, but the iPad has been strongly fill rate limited from the start, and I would say that most developers would see this as the iPads major problems (do a google search for "ipad fill rate" to see what I mean); indeed, even 2D games can at times be tricky to pull off at maximum performance due to this limitation, so I'm pretty sceptical about what would happen if you had to push four times as many pixels as before on a GPU that seems to deliver only about twice the fill rate.
On the other hand, perhaps the double resolution is not intended to be used for games but mainly for web browsing and anything involving a lot of text in the first place, and I can confidently say that I think that a game running at 1024x768 with strong anti-aliasing (something that's not doable on the current generation hardware) scaled up by a factor of two would still look a lot better than what we're currently seeing on the iPad - I think most people strongly underestimate the influence of good anti-aliasing as compared to what you get by doubling the resolution.
My major argument against the iPad 2 delivering such a resolution increase is that while it would be a technological miracle and surely drive up production costs significantly, the incremental sales Apple would achieve with this (as in "how many more people would buy a high-res iPad 2 with camera, more memory, etc. compared to the same iPad 2 but with an only slighty improved screen") definitely wouldn't make up for what Apple would be losing in terms of margins.
None of the competitors are offering this as one of their main selling points, and a strongly evolved (more power, more storage space, camera for facetime, etc.) but not revolutionized iPad 2 at the same price point seems like a very strong offering, so even if they could pull it off from a technological point of view, they'd probably be much better off keeping that ace up their sleeve for next year's offering, don't you think?
On the other hand, perhaps they've decided to instead go for an approach of "shock and awe", and that certainly is what a ultra-high res iPad would be delivering to the competition...
As to what the "iPad2x" graphics files in the latest version of the SDK are supposed to mean, I think there are a multitude of possible answers:
- it's something they've decided to put in now to drum up a bit of hype (unlikely, as they in that case would already know that they won't be able to live up to this particular hype) or to keep competitors guessing at this point in time (more likely),
- they're intended for a Displaylink/HDMI out that should arrive eventually and deliver 1080p
- they're intended for a later version of the iPad which eventually will feature a much higher display resolution
- in order to improve usability, some apps might simply start offering higher zoom levels, which would also mean that higher res artwork will be needed
- etc.
The nice thing about our guessing game is that we'll (hopefully) soon know what the iPad 2 truly does offer.
My best guess at this point is that the screen will be of the same resolution that we currently have, but with less susceptibility to smudging and less glare, but no fundamental changes - those will come eventually, but now is not yet the time.
To make this (and the eventual keynote) a bit more interesting, I'd like to offer a bet to anyone here who's interested and especially to anyone convinced that we will indeed see an iPad 2 with a 2048x1536 resolution:
I'd like to bet an iPad 2 that the resolution on this device will NOT be doubled both horizontally and vertically, i.e. that the iPad 2 will NOT have a resolution of 2048x1536. The odds are 1:1 - if you take the other side and Apple does pull this off, I'll gladly buy you an iPad 2. If they don't, however, you buy me one.
Here's your chance to put your money where your mouth is - anyone in?
huh, you also seem to know what you are talking about.
I don't know what to think.
But I really hope the ipad does go to double res.
I'm not wanting to turn this into a PRSI thread, but the same can be said about creationists and evolution.
Anyways, when the iPhone 4 prototype was released, everyone went "OMG NO! There are cracks, there's no way Apple will release this!" Myself included. But I have learned a lesson, do not dismiss solid evidence like this.
So are you suggesting that the "evidence" in the first post is PROOF that there is a 2048x1536 retina display coming for the iPad?
Despite the fact that nobody seems to know who can manufacture such a display in high enough volume (and that no display factory has made such an announcement), how Apple would sell it at the iPad price point, power it without killing the battery and GPU, and multiple other technical and engineering limitations?
You're saying that you trust a picture on a rumor site over the technical explanations (or lack thereof)? And you're talking about others having blind faith??
I'm not saying it's impossible. Apple engineers are pretty good at what they do. I'm not saying I don't want one -- I'd love to see it happen. But it sure seems unlikely to me.
I'll believe it when I see it.
2x the resolution of 1024x768 is not 2048x1536, are you guys retarded?
1024x768 = 786432 pixels
2048x1536 = 3145728 pixels
thats FOUR TIMES the resolution
1440x1080 is more like it
2x XGA resolution nets 1572864 pixels
1440x1080 = 1555200 pixels (close enough)
1024x768 = 786432 pixels
2048x1536 = 3145728 pixels
thats FOUR TIMES the resolution
1440x1080 is more like it
2x XGA resolution nets 1572864 pixels
1440x1080 = 1555200 pixels (close enough)
No, read my post again... I clearly said I wasn't saying it was definite, just that's it's funny how people react to things with evidence compared to other certain things that will never have evidence.
No, evidence does not always PROVE things, but it can point toward truth.
I have found that Mac enthusiasts and religious fanatics (of whatever persuasion you choose -- atheists, Christians, Muslims, etc.) have an awful lot in common
I just find it hard to believe that Apple would not put a MUCH higher DPI screen in the next iPad that they call a "retina display" ... They would not have named the display that way if they hadn't planned on putting it in multiple products.
The current display is NOT good enough... it's the main reason why I do not have an iPad. Steve said tablets are the future and they need to stay ahead. The screen is the most important aspect at this point.
The current display is NOT good enough... it's the main reason why I do not have an iPad. Steve said tablets are the future and they need to stay ahead. The screen is the most important aspect at this point.
Agree 100%.
However, you can't sell something that doesn't exist. So you have to ask:
1. Is there a factory out there making 9.7", IPS, 2048x1536 displays?
2. Can it produce two-three million a month in order to meet Apple's iPad sales projections?
3. How much does it cost?? Can Apple still sell this thing for $499?
4. Will a MUCH higher resolution display require a MUCH more powerful graphics processor? And a MUCH more powerful battery?
Again, not saying it won't (or can't) happen. Just that there are a LOT of technical hurdles to overcome.
When I see rumors like this one based on someone finding some text, or like here, some images in an Apple application, I always have this crazy idea: What if some Apple engineers sat together and said: Let's have some fun. What would these MacRumors guys do if we put some images into this app at double the needed resolution, just for fun? And then we add some text that makes it look like this is used for an "iPad 2"? Maybe add a message "feature so-and-so is only available on iPhone 5"! That will make them go crazy!
What kind of experience would show that? The performance killers in 3d graphics are texture lookups and pixelshaders. Texture lookups get worse when you need higher resolution source and run into caching problems. And pixelshaders use four times more time with four times more pixels.
Last edited:
Man. People we're very suprised at the very competitive pricing of the iPad. And even the iPod Touch still doesnt have a true competitor at the same price.
And dude...u like Apple, how come u dont understand their ideology then:
THINK DIFFERENT
While I wouldn't think a 1536x2048 display would be possible given the graphics card and battery life goal, I was also skeptical of the Retina Display until it was revealed and didn't believe the iPad could be cheaper than an iPhone. I was wrong both times for not believing in Apple. This time, I'm gonna say it's gonna happen and if I'm wrong at least I'm wrong for a different reason than last time. You can do it, Apple!
Last edited:
My thoughts exactly. While there could be other explanations for having a larger bookmark (whether it be for childrens' books, or a zoom feature), there is really no good explanation for having a wood tile image that has a horizontal resolution of 1536, as it would be impossible to display the entirety of this image on the current iPad's screen (1024x768).
But who are you and I to say who is out there making what? Do any of us really know?! NO.
And someone has to be the first. Like it's been said... the fact that Apple would be ordering SO MANY of these screens, makes it much "easier" to happen and would drive the price down MUCH more.
Were there factories producing 3.5" 960x640 IPS screens before the iPhone 4? I don't think so. It seems as if many are thinking about the past and present and not the FUTURE.
@ds445: very good points.
but nothing is certain about anything yet.
maby we get alot better GPU AND CPU in it, what means the resolution could be made.
But indeed, i doubt it. everyone wants to believe this, including me. but looking at it like a realist, i dont think we will have this.
but like i said before, if this resolution turns out to be true, apple got nothing to worry about anymore. right now company's are getting close. but with such a screen apple but swipe them away 200%.
but nothing is certain about anything yet.
maby we get alot better GPU AND CPU in it, what means the resolution could be made.
But indeed, i doubt it. everyone wants to believe this, including me. but looking at it like a realist, i dont think we will have this.
but like i said before, if this resolution turns out to be true, apple got nothing to worry about anymore. right now company's are getting close. but with such a screen apple but swipe them away 200%.