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.
Resolved Retina display
- Thread starter mtnDewFTW
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It is an idiotic comparison. It all depends on use case. For most screen sizes and reasonable seating positions, 1080p televisions hit the limit of human visual acuity. iPads held a few feet away from your face have very visible pixels, which is exacerbated by iOS's poor text rendering.
itsmemuffins
macrumors 68040
shardey
macrumors 6502a
I don't believe these pixels are "very visible pixels" but more less invisible at that distance. Maybe you have some freakishly crazy eyesight?
lilcosco08
macrumors 65816
I would expect it in iPad 4 at the earliest. And yes, it will be great when happens, no I don't miss it right now despite coming from iPhone 4.
msb3079
macrumors 6502a
Yes it is. One is viewed from several feet away, one is viewed from several INCHES away.
It's common knowledge/sense.
msb3079
macrumors 6502a
msb3079
macrumors 6502a
They are EXTREMELY visible, especially for text. I can see single pixels. On the iPhone 4, it's very difficult to. On my 46" Samsung 1080P TV, at a "normal" viewing distance, I cannot. But on my iPad.. at it's "normal" distance.. I CAN.
azentropy
macrumors 601
No kidding. If you can see pixels on the iPad holding it 3 ft away then I want your eyes! I lose the ability to make out individual pixels at about 18-20 inches.
msb3079
macrumors 6502a
3 foot arms? Who has 3 foot arms?? And even if you did.. you would not hold your arms straight out. Let's get realistic, here. 1.5 ft viewing distance, MAX.
azentropy
macrumors 601
msb3079
macrumors 6502a
Oh, sorry... yeah, I agree with that.. (well disagree).. pixels would be hard to see from 3 feet away..
azentropy
macrumors 601
I guess my point is at a certain distance any two things will look the same. Put them far enough away and Halle Berry and Oprah would look the same! 😀
I have an iPhone 4 and an iPhone 3G. The iPhone 4 has a much better screen and you can really see the difference when holding it close. I normally hold my phone about 10-12" away. But if I put both phones on a table and measure about 24" away from my eyes, "I" really can't the the difference between the two in sharpness (the iPhone 4 is brighter as the 3G is 3 years old now).
The same would happen with the iPad. Since I naturally hold the iPad further away from my face than the iPhone anyway (at about 16-18"), the difference between an iPad and an iPad with Retina display wouldn't be as great to me as the iPhone 4 and iPhone 3G.
Sorry if I started some kind of a weird flame war guys. I was just saying that I'd really like the iPad to have the retina display, along with most products apple makes. I mean who wouldn't like their MacBook pro to have a higher res display. But either way, I'm still very happy with my iPad. This was just me ranting about what I thought. The display itself is still really nice, and HD movies look stunning on it. Hopefully we'll see an iPad with a retina display within the next two years.
I had to return my iPad 2, due to the screen resolution.
I use my iPhone 4 to surf the web, email, txt and as an e-reader. When I bought the iPad, I was hoping it would supplant the iPhone in those duties.
Unfortunately, after a weeks use, I was unable to get used to the pixelation and had to return the device to Apple. For me, the greatest problem with the resolution is its inability to render text as smoothly as the retina display.
If you are able to use it without it bothering you, great. Just know that there are us out there that find it unacceptable.
I use my iPhone 4 to surf the web, email, txt and as an e-reader. When I bought the iPad, I was hoping it would supplant the iPhone in those duties.
Unfortunately, after a weeks use, I was unable to get used to the pixelation and had to return the device to Apple. For me, the greatest problem with the resolution is its inability to render text as smoothly as the retina display.
If you are able to use it without it bothering you, great. Just know that there are us out there that find it unacceptable.
azentropy
macrumors 601
Sure, if it doesn't work for you it doesn't work for you. I have a similar issue with the glass/glossy displays Apple loves. With an iPhone or an iPad I can reposition it to shade it or reduce the glare - but I can't do that with an iMac sitting at my desk (overhead lights and window to my back) or a laptop sitting on my lap. So I won't purchase a glass/glossy displayed computer because I find it unacceptable. Other people are perfectly fine with the glare and reflections.
It definitely doesn't bother me nearly as much as it seems to bother you. It's still a great device, it would just be really cool if Apple could add the retina display to it.
And by the way, to all the people saying that Apple didn't do it for some hardware reason, and the battery, please think again. They have some of the worlds best engineers working on their products, and you're telling me that no one at Apple could make the retina display happen on the iPad? I find it very hard to believe that they just simply 'can't' do it. If they're able to fit an entire working computer into something as thin as a MacBook air and also give it a very decent battery life, think that somehow, Apple can manage to put the retina display on the iPad. I personally feel like they didn't do it simply because it's gonna be the next iPad's big feature. This one already has many selling points. They need something new for the iPad 3 in order for people to be as interested in it as they are in the current iPad.
AZREOSpecialist
Suspended
Tackling your last point first... there was no loss of battery life between iPhone 4 (Retina) and iPhone 3 GS (non-Retina). There is no reason to believe that the same thing can't be accomplished with iPad.
Regarding your first point, if the current iPad 2 at 1024x768 has "9x faster graphics", then a 2048x1536 with quadruple the pixels would still deliver 2.25x faster graphics. If iPad 2 did have a retina display, Apple would be trumpeting "quadruple the resolution and over 2x faster graphics". You don't need "9x faster graphics" to be impressive. 2x faster is pretty good if there's nothing else to compare that with.
There is no tackling it. Where did I say anything about the display being the battery hog? It's the massive GPU you'd have to stick in that thing to crank out the display resolution. Christ almighty, the battery problem has nothing to do with the resolution, and everything to do with the GPU required to power it without going backwards in performance. You're not going to see them sticking a GPU in the iPad capable of powering that resolution with the same or better speed as the current model until we see a die shrink for the SoC's. That's all there is to it. It's not a matter of if, shoulda, coulda, woulda. It's a matter of physics and budget overhead.
You are assuming performance is always linear. It isn't.
Again, stop assuming performance always scales linearly with resolution.
^All of that^ right there is why no one takes anyone seriously in the Mac community when they discuss hardware. Their expectations are based solely off of marketing bullet points and arbitrary "9x, 5x, 3x" measurements from Keynote slides. This topic has been explained to death on this website by many, many individuals to people like you who keep harping on about something they don't understand. So just stop.
Last edited:
And you're smarter than everyone else because you can point out the flaws in their argument? And I'm sorry that the retina display discussion seems to be such a sensitive subject for you. I've obviously not been on this specific section of the forum until just a few days ago, so I would have no knowledge of how many people brought up this topic. Even if I did, the title clearly states "retina display" if you're gonna get all upset and butthurt over what others may say/think, why bother looking?
2/10. A for effort though.
It has nothing to do with being smarter than everyone else and everything to do with not being dumb enough to expect something that is currently not feasible. And not being even dumber to continue harping on the topic after it's been explain a hundred times on the same website.
Search function. Learn how to use it and necro an old thread rather than creating yet another one that will wind up rehashing the same, stupid crap all over again. But of course since you've only been on this section of the forum for "a few days" this must be new and confusing since the iPad section exists within its own continuum where the page has a completely alien design with no search function that's indexed with the rest of the forum.
It will end just like all the other threads about the topic where the mindless drones eventually realize it's not feasible at the moment, regardless of how many Keynote slides and bullet points they mixed up. That will last 48 hours and then the cycle repeats itself.
I just want to add it's not only the gpu, but the amount of ram storing screen and window elements would take. A retina iPad needs 2 or 4 x the ram the iPad 2 has.
Don't even bother.
This has been covered at length before by many people besides myself. Explaining the issues that exist beyond the simple "finding and powering a GPU to display that resolution" is an exercise in futility with these people.
If ever there were a series of threads that needed to be insta-locked by the admins, the "ZOMGWTF RETINA IPAD!!11!" threads are it. Just make a dedicated thread, bold and sticky it, and nuke all the others from orbit.
Then the tards can sit in there and fellate the idea until the cows come home.