Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

More Evidence for 2048x1536 iPad Retina Display

ljocampo said:
So if they can put a retina display in an iPhone 4, then I don't see a reason they can't technically put one in an iPad 3.
Click to expand...

Well, if they "technically" put 1536x2048 display into the next iPad, I promise you AT&T won't be there to subsidize it to same prices as the previous gen. as they did with the iPhone 4.
 
gorskiegangsta said:
Subsidized, maybe. Unlocked and unsubsidized, the iPhone 4 was upwards of $700 (for the lowest 16gb model) with 64gb models running upwards of $1,000. The most expensive model of 3Gs (64gb model) was $649 unlocked and unsubsidized upon its release.
iPads aren't subsidized by carriers, you pay the full retail price for it. It is very likely that adding a display of that resolution will drive the cost up $100 or more. Neither consumers nor Apple want that.

Besides, with the iPhone 4's "retina" display, Apple was only catching up to competition, since the resolution on the 3Gs was painfully archaic 320x480 HVGA, vs competition's obviously superior 480x800 WVGA.
Click to expand...

In Australia, 2009-2010 iPhone 3Gs was 1049... in 2011.. $999.. go figure eh?
Meaning.. faster cpu, retina screen, cameras, higher res cameras...
 
haruhiko said:
In Hong Kong the (unlocked) iPhone 4 is actually cheaper than iPhone 3GS for HK$12 (US$1.5) :D
Click to expand...

That is only as of now, and only because of lack of availability of the 3Gs models compared to iP4 models. Same thing with the iPods; the 4gb 5th gen Nano now actually costs more than the current 8gb 6th gen model.
If you look at prices (unlocked and unsubsidized) upon their release, the 3Gs was significantly cheaper than the iP4 at the time of its release.
 
God catch,mbut it wasn't that hard to spot....so to relay info from others without original research is a bit boring, this is the largest Mac site and yet original research is so ****, worse than pretty much any Mac site. Which was tolerable a few years ago with less Mac users, but it's not anymore. Start reporting your own stuff for a change instead of relaying info. Do some productive work for a change....And honor those add dollars, it's always apple insider said this or that, someone said this or that, and it's never we learned this, apparently macrumors has zero original sources and almost zero original research, wtf?
 
There were a couple things keeping me from being an Ipad/2 owner.

1) I wanted a more fully featured OS
2) Already an iPhone 4 owner, I wanted retina on the iPad

My first concern will be addressed by iOS5, and if this ends up being more than just a rumor, i'll be an iPad 3 owner.
 
2IS said:
There were a couple things keeping me from being an Ipad/2 owner.

1) I wanted a more fully featured OS
2) Already an iPhone 4 owner, I wanted retina on the iPad

My first concern will be addressed by iOS5, and if this ends up being more than just a rumor, i'll be an iPad 3 owner.
Click to expand...


hahaha.....
1) then the soon-to-be-released macbook air is for you. Lion!!!
2) Retina ipad, if produced this year, will be super expensive.... wait till the costs goes down.

Anyways you could get an iPad 2 now, and sell it later and get the iPad 3... that's what I'm going to do hahaha.... the iPad 2 will eventually be in my gf's hands.
 
People need to "let go" of the dream of an iPad 3 in a few months. The 2 is still elusive at stores and has been out only a few months. Isn't this the site where statistical data is collected to predict hardware updates? Does it even make sense for a 5 month product life from Apple? (that last one was kind of rhetorical)
 
ECUpirate44 said:
Steve stood right next to this when the iPad 2 was launched. No iPad 3 until 2012.
View attachment 289610
Click to expand...

So a Keynote slide is supposed to indicate Apple's iPad plans for the next 12 months? SJ also stood in front of a crowded Macworld audience and said we would have 3+ GHz G5 processors within a year. That didn't happen either despite SJ promising on stage.

Don't make assumptions about Apple's product update cycles based on one slide. Even if Apple announces and ships an iPad 3 in September or October, 2011 will still be the "year of iPad 2" because iPad 2 will have outsold everyone this year, even its own successor.
 
oghowie said:
Yeah, it doesn't make sense at all.

There is simply no need for a iPad 3 this year. No Honeycomb tablet has trumped the iPad 2. The new Samsung Tab is very close but Apple can definitely wait till next year to release the iPad 3.
Click to expand...

The hardware is the only selling point. Honeycomb still sucks.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

I hope the A5 will have enough graphic power to run it. It's 4x more pixels to push.

Might have to up the RAM to about a 1GB to given apps more space - doubling worked for the iPhone 4 just fine; 3GS had 256MB and the iPhone 4 had 512MB only.
 
Dreamer2go said:
hahaha.....
1) then the soon-to-be-released macbook air is for you. Lion!!!
2) Retina ipad, if produced this year, will be super expensive.... wait till the costs goes down.

Anyways you could get an iPad 2 now, and sell it later and get the iPad 3... that's what I'm going to do hahaha.... the iPad 2 will eventually be in my gf's hands.
Click to expand...

I don't care of the iPad 3 comes this year, or next. I'm in no rush, just saying that when it does become available and if it does have Retina, i'll buy it. iPad for me is more of a toy that would be nice/convenient to use every once in a while and there's far too many things I do not like about the iPad 2 to be bothered with it, even if I can sell it and recoup some my money back.

I've already got a Macbook Air (2010) and plan on upgrading to Lion as soon as it's available.
 
No way is the iPad 3 being released this year. If that were the case, then iPad 1, 2 and 3 each would have been sold as the current model at some point in 2011. That just doesn't make good business sense, especially if version 2 continues to be in high demand.

That being said, I cannot wait 'til March!
 
gorskiegangsta said:
Can people just stop and think of the practicality (or lack thereof) of 1536x2048 display on something like the iPad before even considering the possibility of such thing.

The obvious benefit is crisper display and text, and thus much better content-viewing/reading experience.

The drawbacks are:
Higher manufacturing price (and thus potentially more expensive retail price)
Apps will be much larger in size (and with some games already hitting 1gb in size, we can potentially see 4gb apps on a device which only has between 16gb and 64gb of storage)
The device will have to quadruple the amount of RAM (from 512mb to potentially 2gb) to still be able to run smoothly.
The higher res images will tax iPad's graphics more and, potentially, decrease battery life.
Click to expand...

But Intel did just come out with 3D chip technology. So maybe, these badass processors of the future can be smaller, but super powerful, while preserving battery life. Think like Steve Jobs!
But seriously...if the ideas for these products came to my mind months earlier...I would prolly be in Steve's shoes instead of here.
Oh well. :p
 
It cost many bucks to upgrade a Mac/PC screen from WXGA(1280*800) to WSXGA, and several hundred to upgrade from WSXGA to WSXGA+ (1680*1050) , even on a large 15 inch, as well as TN panel.

For the iPad 3, the res can be 2048*1536 ? on a 9.7 inch panel, and even IPS, for only 499/16GB? Highly suspect. Not only because of the screen cost, but also the yield rate, all limited by the tech level at present.
 
I think Apple is just testing these things. I am sure they wanted to change much more for iPad 2, but saw that there's no competition and are now holding untill next update. When these tablets start to slowly eat into market share, I think Apple will do another punch.
 
lazyrighteye said:
Steve's stood next to (and said) all sorts of things that later proved misleading (to put it mildly). ;)
Click to expand...

Yea, but seriously, if we backtrack to when the iPod was first introduced in 2001, exactly how many times have Apple deviated from the usual hardware update a year for ALL their iDevices?

We need to stay practical here.

cirus said:
The "ipad" still sounds like a feminine product.
Click to expand...


Wow. Welcome to last year?
 
cirus said:
The "ipad" still sounds like a feminine product.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of other "pads" out there.

HP TouchPad... Asus Eee Pad and PadPhone... LG Optimus Pad...

I agree the name is incredibly silly... and you're not the first person to compare it to a feminine product.

So what's going on? These companies have to feel the same way you do about the word "pad".... but they still went ahead with it. How come?

Oh I know why... Apple called their tablet the iPad.

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery...

I mean seriously.... imagine a bunch of HP/Palm execs sitting in the boardroom: "iPad.... ummmm.... TouchPad.... yeah that's the ticket"

Really?
 
Wonder how much graphic power is required to push the pixels at that resolution. Most big monitors don't even has that resolution.

Will we see a difference in video quality given the size of iphone/ipad.

There are people who see no difference between 720p vs. 1080p :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back