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

Samsung 2560x1600 Tablet LCD Paves Way for iPad Retina Display

lilo777 said:
The size "is not right" because it's not for iPad. It's not actually an iPad related rumor (although someone tried to make it to be one). It's an official Samsung announcement. Motorola uses panels made with this technology in their Altrix phones so this new panel very well might be targeted for next XOOM (and Galaxy Tab).
Click to expand...

Motorola is having a hard enough time selling the first Xoom, not sure they would waste time and money on a successor.
 
Full of Win said:
Exactly why I waited to get the TRUE iPad 2 (aka iPad 3). If the iPad 3 gets this type of screen, a world cell radio (GSM / CDMA) and thunderbolt support, I think many will see it as the iPad 2 in spirit.
Click to expand...

would you pay $150 more for the screen improvement alone (no thunderbolt)?

just curious.
 
MacRumors said:
[url=http://cdn.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png]Image[/url]


Image

​
TUAW notes that Samsung is ready to demonstrate the industry's first 2560 x 1600 10.1" LCD next week at the SID Display Week 2011 International Symposium. The screen comes in at a screen density of 300dpi and is expected to become available for tablets later this year.

Such a high resolution display could pave the way for a true Retina display in a future iPad. We all got very excited earlier this year when it seemed that Apple was already prepping artwork for a double-resolution iPad of 2048x1536. At the time, one of the arguments against it was the lack of availability of such high density displays. TUAW points out that this particular display isn't likely to be used in an iPad but proves that such high density displays are just around the corner.

For what it's worth at least two analysts has predicted that the iPad 3 will indeed get a pixel-doubled Retina display.

Article Link: Samsung 2560x1600 Tablet LCD Paves Way for iPad Retina Display
Click to expand...

NICE.

With everything going digital, I thought 72DPI would be the norm. Graphic designers using 300DPI for print media can port their goodies and keep most of the quality (compression aside), but that also means larger files. I hope the GPU can handle games of that size. :eek:

Pro and con, but the pros outweigh.
 
Funny that the screen would have considerably more pixels than a 65 inch Sony Bravia, but people will expect it to still cost no more than today's iPad.
 
notabadname said:
Funny that the screen would have considerably more pixels than a 65 inch Sony Bravia, but people will expect it to still cost no more than today's iPad.
Click to expand...

yeah, I thought the same thing. Either Apple will take a small hit on the chin (which I doubt)...or it will be a more expensive variant. My other question was, when will 1440 panels be around 500? The U27 and acd are still hovering around 900.
 
Rodimus Prime said:
question is will it go to Apple or will Samsung get to go after it first for themselves.
Click to expand...

The better question is when they are releasing competing tablets, e.g. the Samsung Galaxy, and they clearly have components engineers working their tails off to innovate, why would they possibly share their displays with a competing company, even though they can sell them en masse to apple, when they can make their own tablet superior to the iPad?

Foundries don't make the money, the label on the box makes the money. If you don't know this then think who makes more cash Foxconn or Apple? If they have any sense, they should promise apple this tech, and screw apple over right before they sell these components off, throwing off the iPad release date and making them boatloads by fabricating superior components in their own tablet, since they make nearly every piece of their own tablets anyway. This way, they'd be ahead of the curve, with an earlier release date, and a better device.
 
randomrazr said:
is it worth it on the 15inch macbook pros to pay the extra 150 dollars to jump from a glossy 1440 x 900 reoslution to the anti glare 1680 by 1080 resolution?
Click to expand...

Yes, absolutely. All my glare'd out colleagues are jealous of my hires AG.
 
notabadname said:
Funny that the screen would have considerably more pixels than a 65 inch Sony Bravia, but people will expect it to still cost no more than today's iPad.
Click to expand...

Why should it? It uses the same size glass. Pixel density isnt the determining factor for price when it comes to flat panels. It's size.
 
Very nice if it comes...but on a 9" screen, my feeling is the only value would be for every day pictures or book reading or other still-images.

I still don't see the 9" iPad as a movie player (meaning, a full 2 hour movie) other than the very occasional car ride or airplane trip. Youtube vids and 5 min vids of the kid's 5th birthday, sure.

To truly see the value of such a high resolution, I think the screen needs to be much larger...which would hopefully lend the iPad to actually having a traditional desktop view so that I can have multiple "windows" of information open at once (say a small vid clip running while I type in some notes...or a picture in the corner while I write an email)
 
grindcor said:
The better question is when they are releasing competing tablets, e.g. the Samsung Galaxy, and they clearly have components engineers working their tails off to innovate, why would they possibly share their displays with a competing company, even though they can sell them en masse to apple, when they can make their own tablet superior to the iPad?

Foundries don't make the money, the label on the box makes the money. If you don't know this then think who makes more cash Foxconn or Apple? If they have any sense, they should promise apple this tech, and screw apple over right before they sell these components off, throwing off the iPad release date and making them boatloads by fabricating superior components in their own tablet, since they make nearly every piece of their own tablets anyway. This way, they'd be ahead of the curve, with an earlier release date, and a better device.
Click to expand...

Now Apple would definitely sue over that.
 
This resolution change would make me take interest in iPad. The current resolution is too low for me, after looking at my iPhone 4, the ipad looks weak.
 
I hope the ipad 3 is a year or more away from release. I would be so damn pissed if my ipad 2 gets outdated that quickly.

damn you apple...
 
I won't hold my breath for a high resolution iPad 3--though I'd love to see it of course. Apple has been frustrating slow at providing high resolution options for its notebook line.
 
battery & pixel doubling concerns

well, an iPad with this kind of Retina display will GUARANTEED have a shorter battery life than the current iPad 2.

not sure i want that trade off..... especially since the vast majority of apps will need to run in pixel-doubled mode (which would look like an iPhone app on the current iPad) until the devs re-do their apps into super-HD resolution.

plus, would they do that for free? or would you need to buy an "upgraded" version of your current iPad apps?
 
grindcor said:
The better question is when they are releasing competing tablets, e.g. the Samsung Galaxy, and they clearly have components engineers working their tails off to innovate, why would they possibly share their displays with a competing company, even though they can sell them en masse to apple, when they can make their own tablet superior to the iPad?

Foundries don't make the money, the label on the box makes the money. If you don't know this then think who makes more cash Foxconn or Apple? If they have any sense, they should promise apple this tech, and screw apple over right before they sell these components off, throwing off the iPad release date and making them boatloads by fabricating superior components in their own tablet, since they make nearly every piece of their own tablets anyway. This way, they'd be ahead of the curve, with an earlier release date, and a better device.
Click to expand...

I found a post by dapsta that may answer your question why samsung doesn't use their components only for their gadgets.

"Theres a lot of back room considerations when looking at the tech market, I suspect the only reason a company like Samsung wouldn't just out spec everyone (including android competitors) by miles and do it cheaply is restraint. It needs to stay on par with everyone and not miss out on the ability to sell and incremental handset upgrade. "
 
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