iPad 2 Screen Likely to Have 2048x1536 resolution

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, Jan 15, 2011.

  1. zap2 macrumors 604

    zap2

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    Washington D.C
    #76

    To be fair, those consoles are 5 or 6 years old. They were cutting edge, not so much today. Also the reason they support the resolutions they do isn't a matter of power, but a result of HDTVs being defined at a certain resolution.


    I'll admit, I'd be impressed if Apple released the iPad 2 with such a high resolution, but I'd love it(and I can totally see them wanting to, its just an issue of where current day technology is)
     
  2. TuffLuffJimmy macrumors G3

    TuffLuffJimmy

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #77
    Those are CPUs. You don't get what a GPU is...
     
  3. appleguy123 macrumors 604

    appleguy123

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Location:
    15 minutes in the future
    #78

    If anyone could do this, it would be Steve, but I still stand by my monitor support or universal iOS+Mac apps theory.
     
  4. Full of Win macrumors 68030

    Full of Win

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2007
    Location:
    Ask Apple
    #79
    Why? The iPhone 4 increased its pixel count 4X from the previous versions and did not need a massive increase in battery size. Why should the iPad be any different?
     
  5. Apple... macrumors 68020

    Apple...

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Location:
    The United States
    #80
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone 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)

    Maybe you need more apps/ movies?
     
  6. rivertrip macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2010
    #81
    "From a developer's perspective, the doubling of an existing resolution is much easier to support."

    Only for developers who don't understand the meaning of "resolution independent".
     
  7. Durendal macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2003
    #82
    All I can say is...

    HOLY *****!!!!

    An iPad with a resolution greater than 1080p? Holy damn, that might just make the thing closer to being worth $500+!
     
  8. Apple... macrumors 68020

    Apple...

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Location:
    The United States
    #83
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone 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)

    Agreed. It doesn't need to be any heavier than what it already is.
     
  9. kny3twalker macrumors 65816

    kny3twalker

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    #84
    the current display is IPS like the iMacs and iPhone
     
  10. Xero910 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2003
    #85
    Thats not entirely true. The PS3 is perfectly capable of "full" 1080p hd. However the majority of games only support 720p. Not because of the tv set, but because the performance suffered when rendering the game that high. Are we supposed to expect the iPad 2 will render games even higher than 1080p? And do it all while disconnected from a power source, without lag, running on mobile chips? Seems impossible, but I really do hope I'm wrong and they found a way to pull it off.
     
  11. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #86
    You well know what I mean, stop playing dumb. If I to spell out what I mean, well, you are too thick for a logical discussion. I think Tegra said it all.
     
  12. TuffLuffJimmy macrumors G3

    TuffLuffJimmy

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2007
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    #87
    I'm not playing dumb. You just don't know what you're talking about!
    One word means next to nothing! Quit being ambiguous just because you don't know the first thing about graphics processors.
     
  13. Piggie macrumors G3

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #88
    I did think of one way this could be done a few months ago, and did post my ideas. God knows where though!

    My general idea was that they could make a custom gpu that could handle this doubled res just for static images only, reading a book etc.

    But, and here's the clever bit, the gpu basically pixel doubled what it did when it came to animation or games, so you only got 1024x768 on movement or in a game as the custom chip was basically grabbing 4 pixels at a time to do the movement.

    However when the movement stopped it then rezzed the screen up to it's full capacity.

    I've no idea if/how this would work, but I think it sounds a reasonable concept to address the issues.

    You don't need to see every pixel during a scroll or something. Perhaps your eyes could no even notice it? But as soon as the movement stops the full res is restored.

    That's the basis of the idea I had of a way it could work.

    I don't know what anyone else thinks of this as a workable solution ?
     
  14. elppa macrumors 68040

    elppa

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    #89
    :D at all those people who claimed this could never be a feature on the next generation iPad because no one else is making a 9.7" 2048x1536 display on a tablet.

    Good way to leave RIM's PlayToy in the dust. 1024x600 - it will look like the cataract display next to iPad. A difference even the untrained eye would notice.

    I guess the only way to compete with that is to offer a curved screen**, or a circular one or something! Certainly no one is going to touch that ppi on a tablet and hit Apple's prices anytime soon. And I'm sure iPad will cost the same or less than iPad one.

    Having said that my 1440x900 15" starts to look a bit pokey as well. Hopeful high density displays come 'back to the Mac' as well.

    I hope it does go ahead. It will give me months of material for winding up fandroids on engadget. :)

    ** I believe this is an actual feature of this week's must-have Android phone. Or was it last weeks, I can't remember?

    If it is for iBooks that suggests to me the business case to justify the cost of the display is to try and nail the reading/e-book/magazine experience. No one is going to be hooking iBooks up to an external monitor. They'll be read on the device itself.
     
  15. cxny macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2004
    Location:
    New York
    #90
    Got plenty of Apps, but would never bother adding a movie to it for one viewing. Don't use it for music either as iPods are better for that.
     
  16. appleguy123 macrumors 604

    appleguy123

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Location:
    15 minutes in the future
    #91
    I think that we should stop equating the iPhone pixel quadrupling to the iPad's.
    For the iPhone, we didn't know that such a screen existed, but we already knew about the chips, because the iPad had such a chip.
    With the iPad, we're pretty sure that such a screen would be greatly expensive and infeasible, and we know of absolutely no mobile chips that could handle that.
    It's sorta like saying that you had no problem downing a double cheeseburger from McDonald's so double deep dish pizza should be no problem for you either.
     
  17. msb3079 macrumors 6502a

    msb3079

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Location:
    collingswood. nj
    #92
    How can some of you say 260+DPI is "overkill". Remember, ONE (of several) of the objectives of the iPad is to be a reader and compete with the Kindles and all those things. Of course they use a different screen technology, but reading text on them is "easy" and smooth... and it also is on the iPhone 4. It simply is NOT on the current iPad (which is why I don't have one..). I won't be using it to read, but I'm anal about screen quality and after the iPhone 4, am pretty damn picky. Even with my head 1.5 feet from my MacBook Pro, typing right now.. I can still see every little pixel.

    When Steve announced the iPhone 4, he talked A LOT about the Retina display. It was obvious to me back then, that similar screens would start making their way into more Apple products. It went to the Touch and I think the iPad is next... I'd be shocked if it was not.

    Some of you try to come up with all these different reasons why it's "not possible" but you're thinking about the past and not the future. I think it's much less of a stretch, at this point to be quadrupling the pixels in the iPad then it was to quadruple them in the iPhone back when that was done. It's technology, it moves quick and there's no reason why it shouldn't or won't be done. I just can't wait to get one.
     
  18. Full of Win macrumors 68030

    Full of Win

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2007
    Location:
    Ask Apple
    #93
    This is what I've been posting for months. Give devs the option to run at 1024 X 768 for games, but have the higher res as an OPTION, such as for reading books or looking at pictures.

    Your game cannot run at full res? fine, run it at a lower res, no problem.
     
  19. Dr Kevorkian94 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    Location:
    SI, NY
    #94
    this is exiting i cant wait for this event in march!
     
  20. msb3079 macrumors 6502a

    msb3079

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2010
    Location:
    collingswood. nj
    #95
    I definitely think the 4 design is the best.. but 2 and 3 are the worst.
     
  21. nagromme macrumors G5

    nagromme

    Joined:
    May 2, 2002
    #96
    Wow, that’s bigger than 1080p... bigger (in detail) than my iMac!

    I found it hard to believe those rumors, but I’m getting my hopes up.

    BTW, that rumored new GPU (earlier MR article) can push twice the pixels per second (1 billion vs. 500 million plus some more polys). But this new screen would have 4x the pixels. Unless they use dual GPU cores, I wonder if game performance would be affected? (I realize fillrate alone is not the entire performance equation. And that the CPU is likely to be faster. But the GPU is the bottleneck for some things.)

    EDIT: I see discussion of running at half res for some games. Maybe necessary. (And some games just won’t get “retina” updates anyway—but will still be fun.)
     
  22. celo48 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2010
    #97
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A306 Safari/6531.22.7)

    Where do I sign?

    So, Feb or Apr? Any new rumors about the release date?
     
  23. r018u macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2010
    #98
    You can put anything on the fact the resolution will increase. But double? I wouldn't put it past Apple! Plus if they are considering this upgrade for the iPad, then surely they will be increasing the resolution of the Mac products in 2011.
     
  24. Xero910 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2003
    #99
    The amount of pixels the iPhone 4 added is nothing in comparison to the amount of pixels the iPad 2 is rumoured to be adding. The benefit the iPad has is its size. It can support a massive battery. Which it will need.

    Agreed, however I'd say 90% of the apps aren't resolution independent and won't be for some time. Creating resolution independent artwork isn't an easy task. Especially if you deal with detailed icons and graphics. Such as space or weather apps.

    Good point. Thankfully we don't have to wait to long to find out! I'd still like to find out the comparisons between the GPU/CPU in both consoles and compare it to the specs for the rumoured iPad 2 chips. Anyone know where I can find that out?
     
  25. jav6454 macrumors P6

    jav6454

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2007
    Location:
    1 Geostationary Tower Plaza
    #100
    If you don't know what Tegra is, you have no right to discuss tech like this. So please go troll elsewhere.

    Or go read up on AnandTech all about Tegra and mobile GPUs
     

Share This Page