what's the purpose of 2048X1536 resolution?

[Big-TDI-Guy]

I'm not sure I understand. When I draw a line a 1 pixel width are you saying it does not translate to 1 pixel of the resolution? I would think that 2048x1536 would produce more PPI, thus details, than 1024x768, giving more and smaller pixels within the same physically measured dimensions of a canvas, eg 5"x3" or whatever arbitrary size. So the ipad's PPI would increase from 132 to 264 if the screen size stayed the same.

The screen can have 2048 x 1536 resolution, however the input (touch sensor) that covers the screen, does not have anything near this same resolution. So my guess is that a drawing program (at native resolution) is limited to the resolution of the input / touch sensor.

I've seen DPI and PPI confused, and interchanged before. From an image standpoint, they can be interchanged, however I've seen DPI relating to scanner input resolution, and printer output resolution - whereas PPI is the resolution density of your LCD itself.

 

[spinedoc77]

The screen can have 2048 x 1536 resolution, however the input (touch sensor) that covers the screen, does not have anything near this same resolution. So my guess is that a drawing program (at native resolution) is limited to the resolution of the input / touch sensor.

I've seen DPI and PPI confused, and interchanged before. From an image standpoint, they can be interchanged, however I've seen DPI relating to scanner input resolution, and printer output resolution - whereas PPI is the resolution density of your LCD itself.

Ahh I see, so the touch sensor itself is the roadblock, I suppose this is part of the reason the cintiq's are so expensive. It's a shame though, seems with apples well known strength in the graphics market they would want to implement something like this.

 

[Telp]

Based on your wording and terminology you seem tech savvy to some degree, but your perspective on this topic is coming across as uninformed. I don't have the time to cite all the indications that prove you wrong, but there are more than a few.

Your perspective on the topic seems to be even less informed due to the amount of insight you actually posted here. I'd be interested in seeing some of these "indications that prove him wrong" seeing as I think he brings up valid points.

 

[mattraehl]

Ahh I see, so the touch sensor itself is the roadblock, I suppose this is part of the reason the cintiq's are so expensive. It's a shame though, seems with apples well known strength in the graphics market they would want to implement something like this.

This is a gross oversimplification, but basically what you have with the iPhone (and any capacative touch screen really) is a transparent layer between the glass and the LCD screen, which does the touch sensing.
If you look your iPhone or iPad in the right angle and light you can see the grid - the squares are much larger than screen pixels. When you touch the screen with your finger, the hardware "sees" a circle (the tip of your finger) touching the screen. Some combination of hardware and software (I don't know the details) approximate where the center of the circle is, translate it to a specific pixel, and sends that information to the app. (i.e. touch detected at coordinates x = 248, y = 622)

The reason styluses for the iPad have such fat tips is if you make the contact point too small, the center of the touch point can't be properly detected. So, an iPad 3 with a 2048x1536 screen could certainly make handwriting look a lot nicer with the better resolution, but it wouldn't solve the problem of having to use wide-tipped styluses, unless they also manage to improve the touch-sensitive part of the screen.

 

[spinedoc77]

This is a gross oversimplification, but basically what you have with the iPhone (and any capacative touch screen really) is a transparent layer between the glass and the LCD screen, which does the touch sensing.
If you look your iPhone or iPad in the right angle and light you can see the grid - the squares are much larger than screen pixels. When you touch the screen with your finger, the hardware "sees" a circle (the tip of your finger) touching the screen. Some combination of hardware and software (I don't know the details) approximate where the center of the circle is, translate it to a specific pixel, and sends that information to the app. (i.e. touch detected at coordinates x = 248, y = 622)

The reason styluses for the iPad have such fat tips is if you make the contact point too small, the center of the touch point can't be properly detected. So, an iPad 3 with a 2048x1536 screen could certainly make handwriting look a lot nicer with the better resolution, but it wouldn't solve the problem of having to use wide-tipped styluses, unless they also manage to improve the touch-sensitive part of the screen.

Any idea what PPI the ipad 1/2 touch sensor is? I would assume 72dpi otherwise I would think sketch programs would have tried to max it out?

Also do you guys think with the increased resolution/PPI of the ipad 3 there would be any reason for Apple to put in a higher PPI touch sensor? Or do you think Apple will keep what I am assuming is a 72dpi touch sensor in the ipad 3?

 

[tommot82]

because apple can!... and others aren't!

 

[Big-TDI-Guy]

Any idea what PPI the ipad 1/2 touch sensor is? I would assume 72dpi otherwise I would think sketch programs would have tried to max it out?

Also do you guys think with the increased resolution/PPI of the ipad 3 there would be any reason for Apple to put in a higher PPI touch sensor? Or do you think Apple will keep what I am assuming is a 72dpi touch sensor in the ipad 3?

I've been wondering this myself, whether or not the higher res display would also include a bump in the capacitive sensor resolution. Thing is, I'm not sure the iPhone 4 4/S got the bump, at least from what I can tell. Another roadblock, is the fact fingers are generally fat, and not very precise. So unless these were built specifically for accuracy - I doubt Apple would spend the $ on a better input. Outside of drawing, very nice handwriting - the benefits are hard to see (from an overall perspective), when you consider the vast majority of usage.

But I wouldn't mind being surprised come launch day.

 

[dell who?]

Your perspective on the topic seems to be even less informed due to the amount of insight you actually posted here. I'd be interested in seeing some of these "indications that prove him wrong" seeing as I think he brings up valid points.

Do people on the forums here not read the articles on the main page? I'm just wondering, because it seems futile to cite things within a specific thread when this forum is connected to a site that is dedicated to speculation surrounding Apple. Is the forum for people who need to be spoon-fed?

We will all know whether or not a retina display is outfitted in the iPad 3 soon enough. Personally, I'm hoping it happens, because it would be a much needed improvement to the device.

 

[Telp]

Do people on the forums here not read the articles on the main page? I'm just wondering, because it seems futile to cite things within a specific thread when this forum is connected to a site that is dedicated to speculation surrounding Apple. Is the forum for people who need to be spoon-fed?

We will all know whether or not a retina display is outfitted in the iPad 3 soon enough. Personally, I'm hoping it happens, because it would be a much needed improvement to the device.

It's true that sometimes I miss articles on the main page. I must also have missed where you are not to be challenged and do not need to cite any of your statements. I'll let all my professors know that I don't need to give them a citation with my papers because they have the information already, and I don't want to "spoon-feed" any information to them when they can just go on the internet and find it themselves. Besides. The website is called macRUMORS for a reason.

 

[stevensr123]

Go read anything from this websites on an iPad 2. Then go read it on an iPhone 4S. Zoom in so the text is the same size. You will be confused no longer.

Who the hell zooms into text that much though? for great looking pictures, movies etc yes i understand, but text? looks perfect fine to me, and looked perfectly fine on the iPad 2

----------

1080p is already done by the competition.
Apple will certainly come up with something that is
a) a big leap forward
b) preserves the current key features (battery live especially)
c) does not screw up the existing content

That leaves us with 2048x1536

the competition uses 1080p...and? 1080p will still be an improvement, which is what people want isn't it?

 

[APlotdevice]

the competition uses 1080p...and? 1080p will still be an improvement, which is what people want isn't it?

His third point is the most important. Apps for the iPad simply aren't designed to run on a whole bunch of different resolutions. Most of it's going to have to be scaled up in the beginning. 2048x1536, having exactly twice the horizontal and twice the vertical pixels as the existing iPad resolution, is actually much easier to scale existing software up to.

Also if they kept the 4:3 ratio, which Apple most certainly will, then it would still be at a slight disadvantage.

 

[MythicFrost]

His third point is the most important. Apps for the iPad simply aren't designed to run on a whole bunch of different resolutions. Most of it's going to have to be scaled up in the beginning. 2048x1536, having exactly twice the horizontal and twice the vertical pixels as the existing iPad resolution, is actually much easier to scale existing software up to.

Also if they kept the 4:3 ratio, which Apple most certainly will, then it would still be at a slight disadvantage.

You can't simply scale them up unless it's to a multiple of the original resolution, you've got to code the OS to support variable resolutions -- like Android.

The only way you can scale them up is if it's an exact multiple of the original resolution, so 1024x768>2048x1536>3072x2304, etc., and it's not really "scaling up" which implies being stretched, rather it's actually being drawn with four times more detail, and for both Apple and developers, that's seamless.

 

[dell who?]

It's true that sometimes I miss articles on the main page. I must also have missed where you are not to be challenged and do not need to cite any of your statements. I'll let all my professors know that I don't need to give them a citation with my papers because they have the information already, and I don't want to "spoon-feed" any information to them when they can just go on the internet and find it themselves. Besides. The website is called macRUMORS for a reason.

I've clearly upset you over this, so let me apologize for not citing the sources for my position (I've worked in and around Apple for 5+ years and I've sold ~$5 million of Apple products, plus I actually read the articles and follow the industry, just in case you still needed that). My base assumption was that people wouldn't be in this forum if they didn't have an interest in what's going on with the news and "rumors" that are circulating, so I took issue with someone asserting their opinion when they clearly are not paying as close of attention to what's going on. Strange to me that you defended that person, but I guess everyone needs a friend. Thanks for making sure to put me in my place Zach Braff.

 

[elistan]

Who the hell zooms into text that much though? for great looking pictures, movies etc yes i understand, but text? looks perfect fine to me, and looked perfectly fine on the iPad 2

You don't have to zoom *IN* to see it - just zoom such that the text size on the iPad 2 is the same as the text size on the iPhone 4. To me, there is a significant distance. Enough such that I have no interest in purchasing an iPad 2.

Apple's marketing pic for the iPhone 4 illustrates the difference. At normal iPhone/iPad viewing distances, I find it very noticeable.

Now only if my computer monitors were this high-res, instead of 96 dpi... At least they're further away, so that while the individual pixels are noticable, they're not terrible. And the anti-glare coating gives them a slight fuzzy look that blurs the individual pixels a bit, too.

 

[DenisAuermann]

1080p is already done by the competition.
Apple will certainly come up with something that is
a) a big leap forward
b) preserves the current key features (battery live especially)
c) does not screw up the existing content

that leaves us with 2048x1536

this ^