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

What is the point behind 400+ PPI?

Oppressed

Oppressed

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Aug 15, 2010
1,265
10
Reading about all the different phones coming out of CES 2013 and it seems to be a common thing to see the full 1080p phones that sport over 440 PPI. I have to wonder what is the point? If people cannot see past a certain point is the phone only wasting precious graphics processing power and energy consumption to enable such a high pixel density? I don't want to spark a debate from those who cram the phone in their face and say they can see the pixels on 326 PPI devices, but for the majority of us what is the benefit of these displays?

Personally I would like to see development on a phone that moves to vector based UI. That would be more interesting than cramming more pixels into a display and calling it innovation (re: 4K TVs).

Thoughts?
 
Marketing. People like the sound of "full HD" lol. I had a dead pixel on my iPhone 4S and you literally had to move your eyes to 3 cm away from the screen to see it. Of course I didn't take it back as it was impossible to see from any normal viewing distance.
 
Also, there are lots of people who can easily differentiate the pixels on an iPhone 5 or iPad 3/4.

Of course, that's because, when you look at a retina display you can't differentiate the pixels when you hold it at the 'normal viewing distance'.

These are the distances at which most people, with 20/20 vision, CANNOT differentiate the pixels.

iPad 3/4: 13 inch (or further) away from your eyes
iPhone 5: 11 inch (or further) away from your eyes
15" Retina MacBook Pro: 16 inch (or further) away from your eyes

This means anyone with reasonably good vision, can still differentiate the pixels when they hold these devices closer to their eyes. It is not uncommon for people to keep their phones or tablets closer to their eyes.

Personally, I'd like to see displays with higher pixel densities so that I cannot differentiate the pixels at all.

As it turns out, this is 'do-able' with modern technology. Scientists say that most people no longer can focus sharply on objects that 15 to 20 cm away from their eyes (6 to 8 inches).

As it turns out, at 440 pixels per inch, you need to hold the display at a distance of 7.81" from your eyes (if you have 20/20 vision) and don't want to be able to distinguishe the pixels.

At 500 pixels per inch, you need to hold the display 6.88" away from your eyes if you don't want to distinguish the pixels.

With 440 ppi-displays, we're quite close to that maximum of 8 inches. At 500 pixels per inch, we're already at 6.88".

I'd say that 440 ppi is really quite nice and that, at that density, there are already people who can't distinguish the pixels anymore.

At 500 pixels per inch and up, I think we really get into the range of "90-99%" of the people can't distinguish the pixels. I'd like us to see us go there. :)
 
I feel safe in saying those people that hold their eyes close enough to a screen to distinguish pixels won't have that ability for long.

:D
 
I don't cram my phone to my face at all. Even at normal veiwing distances, the difference in sharpness between 440ppi and 326ppi is CLEARLY noticeable. You have to experience it. I garuntee if apple were to come out with such a display, there wouldn't be this thread and people would be acting like its the second coming of Christ.
 
Oppressed said:
Reading about all the different phones coming out of CES 2013 and it seems to be a common thing to see the full 1080p phones that sport over 440 PPI. I have to wonder what is the point? If people cannot see past a certain point is the phone only wasting precious graphics processing power and energy consumption to enable such a high pixel density? I don't want to spark a debate from those who cram the phone in their face and say they can see the pixels on 326 PPI devices, but for the majority of us what is the benefit of these displays?

Personally I would like to see development on a phone that moves to vector based UI. That would be more interesting than cramming more pixels into a display and calling it innovation (re: 4K TVs).

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

There is this great article on cultofmac about it (it is actually about how the retina display is not really retina).
http://www.cultofmac.com/173702/why-retina-isnt-enough-feature/
 
TacticalDesire said:
I don't cram my phone to my face at all. Even at normal veiwing distances, the difference in sharpness between 440ppi and 326ppi is CLEARLY noticeable. You have to experience it. I garuntee if apple were to come out with such a display, there wouldn't be this thread and people would be acting like its the second coming of Christ.
Click to expand...

You speak as though you have seen 440 PPI devices first hand. I had thought they were only now being introduced at CES but if there is one available now I would like to know what it is so I can go see for myself.
 
Oppressed said:
Reading about all the different phones coming out of CES 2013 and it seems to be a common thing to see the full 1080p phones that sport over 440 PPI. I have to wonder what is the point? If people cannot see past a certain point is the phone only wasting precious graphics processing power and energy consumption to enable such a high pixel density? I don't want to spark a debate from those who cram the phone in their face and say they can see the pixels on 326 PPI devices, but for the majority of us what is the benefit of these displays?

Personally I would like to see development on a phone that moves to vector based UI. That would be more interesting than cramming more pixels into a display and calling it innovation (re: 4K TVs).

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to attack you OP but one thing I have noticed here (this board) is that whenever someone else releases something better than Apple, we, Apple fans, always argue by saying "what's the point?", "why do we need it?", "that is so lame!", etc. When Apple releases the same thing, we are all like "ohhh...wahhhh!"

Just like digital cameras' "megapixel war", this is a type of war in phone industries. Nothing wrong with having more pixels as long as it does not compromise performance or battery life.
 
nepalisherpa said:
I'm not trying to attack you OP but one thing I have noticed here (this board) is that whenever someone else releases something better than Apple, we, Apple fans, always argue by saying "what's the point?", "why do we need it?", "that is so lame!", etc. When Apple releases the same thing, we are all like "ohhh...wahhhh!"

Just like digital cameras' "megapixel war", this is a type of war in phone industries. Nothing wrong with having more pixels as long as it does not compromise performance or battery life.
Click to expand...

I completely see where you are coming from. In fact I am finding myself looking at other new devices like the Sony Experia Z and it looks really good. I guess it is hard to take this from someone who posts in an Apple favored forum but I would still question this issues even if Apple came out with it. Battery technology isn't evolving fast enough as compared to display and CPU technology. These extra pixels come at a cost, and not even Apple can make that magic happen.
 
Oppressed said:
You speak as though you have seen 440 PPI devices first hand. I had thought they were only now being introduced at CES but if there is one available now I would like to know what it is so I can go see for myself.
Click to expand...

The Droid DNA is 440 PPI.
 
I can only really tell the difference when text is involved. As it is, I damn near need a magnifying glass to read text on my 4S, so I do not see the point in cramming in more ppi at the same size. Make the damn thing bigger with all that extra ppi.

With the new technology, engineers can make a car engine that gets 80mph, but what they do instead is make the engine smaller with the same HP and 28-32mph or put it in a big honkin' SUV and claim it's green (sorry, side rant, haha)
 
Oppressed said:
If people cannot see past a certain point is the phone only wasting precious graphics processing power and energy consumption to enable such a high pixel density?
Click to expand...

Well, it can display 1080p video without having to downscale it, so it's saving graphics processing power and thus energy consumption.
 
Random 995K said:
Marketing. People like the sound of "full HD" lol
Click to expand...

Yeah, you know, I don't think it's so much targeting 400+ PPI as it is targeting resolutions that play well in the head of the consumer ... the side effect, if you will, is tremendous PPI. i.e., you take 1920x1080 (which the marketing folks will have a blast with...) and cram it into 4-5" displays, you're going to wind up with a very high PPI.

I still contend that the 326PPI and retina marketing spin, was reversed engineered after a smart designer suggested simple doubling the X/Y pixel count on the iPhone 3GS, I don't suspect it was ever a real specific design goal.
 
Mrbobb said:
They have no real innovation so they sell your BIGGER! MORE PIXELS!

----------



For folk who are number-chasers, fine. Apple is not playing that game.
Click to expand...

It seems like they were with their "Retina" 300+ PPI displays. :rolleyes:
 
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