Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by UBS28, Aug 24, 2013.
What IPS technology is Apple using since there is S-IPS, AS-IPS, IPS-Pro, H-IPS and so on?
The LG panels are AH-IPS and the Samsung panels are S-PLS, which is basically Samsung's implementation of AS-IPS. Apple's display engineering team also created some significant enabling technology, and those patents are either licensed to both manufacturers for integration or are part of custom components supplied to them for Apple-bound parts, so they do not work exactly identically to traditional AH or AS IPS panels. In that sense, they're both "Apple-IPS".
Is this just idle curiosity or is there more to this question?
I am looking for information which points how good the IPS display is in comparison to external IPS displays. Apparently the IPS dispaly on my iPad isn't that great if I have to believe certain people.
Many thanks for providing this information btw
both test all the important metrics of panels. There you can see how good they are.
It is just like normal IPS, I think. There are displays with better contrast but in most other qualities they are quite good. IPS in general isn't great with contrast.
That's inside baseball and I suspect whoever that was is parroting a line s/he heard and misunderstood somewhere. There's no inherent difference, as at the level of comparing different IPS technologies, almost every other part of the monitor stack makes a bigger difference to image quality.
The difference is a small fraction of the change from IPS to non-IPS or non-LCD TFT displays.
Those sites do basic or user-level tests that are not going to reveal meaningful differentiation between subtypes of IPS displays.
If by "normal" IPS you mean the original implementation, then no, they're not. Otherwise, they're all "normal".
Only in relative terms compared to the idiotic spec races and contrast ratio manipulation. There are fewer ways to cheat on an IPS panel. Contrast is more than adequate for almost any reproduction needs.
Indeed. They reveal the info that has actually any impact on the user experience.
He wants to know how the quality performs in relation to stand alone displays. From what chemicals which polarization filter is made won't help him there. Only user-level tests do show the relevant info.
It helps reading the followup posts of the op.
Right, which you can't determine based on IPS subtype. Reviews aren't going to distinguish between them in that way, so sending him to a general review site isn't going to answer whether one type of display is better than another based on its position in the IPS family tree.
Yes, it does--maybe you should try it. Also helpful: knowing enough about the subject to answer the question correctly.
He wants to know how the mobile IPS DISPLAY compares to external DISPLAYS of similar type. He wants to know the quality difference between the TWO.
External vs. Internal doesn't have anything to do with IPS subtypes. Those don't matter if you are interested in quality metrics, the actual quality metrics MATTER.
It is also helpful to comprehend written text enough to understand what information a poster is actually looking for.
Sigh. Go back to the beginning.
He asked what kind of IPS display is in the MacBook, because he believed there was an inherent quality difference based on bad information he received elsewhere, so that he could use that information to compare external monitors.
You sent him to some websites that do a general baseline comparison of various monitors, which has nothing to do with his original question, and without much more context than you provided, has nothing to do with his followup question, either.
The review sites will help him pick an external monitor and will, to a much more limited extent, give him some information on how the retina display performs compared to desktop monitors. It will not tell him whether there's a difference between IPS subtypes (the idea underlying his original question) and it will not tell him directly "how good" it is in comparison to "external IPS" displays (his followup). It also will not explain what "normal IPS" is (not that there even is such a thing).
Clearly, if he's aware that there are different branches of IPS technology, he's aware of the existence of online product reviews and was asking for something more than a dismissive link to reviews that aren't even sorted by panel type or relationship. Taken together, he was asking whether the observed benchmarks are caused by the IPS subtype more than other factors and the answer is no. And to top off the unhelpful reply, you're rude to boot.