There is no iPad 3. I'm sure the OP meant meant the new iPad.
Why does the ipad 3 have better resolution than even $600 monitors ?
- Thread starter eastmen
- Start date
There is no iPad 3. I'm sure the OP meant meant the new iPad.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Sure and 1920x1200 (23" for Apple) monitors as well as 2560x1600 (30" for Apple) monitors were also just natural evolutions that Apple attempted to push. Both with limited success.
But as I mentioned this current push might have more traction as TV manufacturer's are interested in something to attempt to convince everyone with HDTVs that they need a new TV. 3D has mostly failed with regards to that. So next up is the 4k push. If that is successful it'll drive high resolution displays to PCs more-so than just Apple trying to push the tech.
You'll notice that while Apple's push with 1920x1200 eventually failed. 1920x1080 succeeded (due to massive investment in panels and tech by the TV manufacturers). And eventually even Apple following the HDTV manufacturers lead by dropping the 16:10 ratio in favor of 16:9 for their high end displays (2560x1440). They abandoned their 1920x1200 push much earlier moving to 1920x1080.
On mobile tablets with small screens, Apple definitely has greater influence however as other tablets still can't compete. So whatever Apple pushes is going to be the dominant display tech in that market segment.
For mobile phones we're likely going there as well. The cost to implement should be even cheaper than tablets. For larger displays like those for desktop use however, TV manufacturer's are likely going to be what determines whether we get affordable high pixel density displays or not.
And at least with regards to Tablets I do so hope other manufacturer's follow their lead. In my case, however, not necessarily with the pixel density (although I do like that quite a bit) but the form factor. 4:3 is so much better for a tablet than 16:9 (barf). I hope more tablet manufacturers go the 4:3 route. I'm looking at you Win8 tablet makers.
Although I do have to note that 4:3 tablets existed long before the iPad came around. But I'm ever so grateful that Apple decided to stick with 4:3 and not go to 16:9 or even 16:10.Regards,
SB
Blazkowicz
Legend
a buddy has a 16:9 tablet, it's not too bad. it was less than a third the price of an ipad, and it served him well for watching movies. especially when sleeping in the decommissioned truck/van.
he's homeless, most other people I know have a laptop or a tower (that I provide sometimes) but tablets, I see them like once in a year.
tablets have a niche in 1st world homeless people. it could end up like wine, adopted by the most depraved underclass and by top executives and CEOs.
he's homeless
, most other people I know have a laptop or a tower (that I provide sometimes) but tablets, I see them like once in a year.tablets have a niche in 1st world homeless people. it could end up like wine, adopted by the most depraved underclass and by top executives and CEOs.
No, those were a push for a specific resolution and aspect ratio, and there are several other resolutions or aspect ratios they could have chosen.
But there is no alternative to "higher resolution".
I think high-ppi monitors will become common long before 4k TVs will. The typical upgrade cycle is shorter, and the benefits are much more substantial. Also, there won't be a single resolution across all screen sizes.
Due to manufacturing and price, small devices get high-ppi first. Windows 8 tablets will need high resoltution to compete, and this will finally force developers to take high-ppi seriously for all Windows applications. And once people have seen the benefits with their own eyes, the demand for larger high-ppi monitors will be there.
Fully agreed. And using a 22" widescreen as my desktop monitor at home, I can say I was a little bit shocked by how big the pixels are still on that screen, especially noticeable for text. I can definitely live with a push to a higher PPI. Even the 220 PPI that the Vita gives still gives noticeable pixels, so I think that 300DPI plus (depending indeed on eye distance) is a worthwhile push and will happen. We're not at the point where the eye can't tell the difference anymore, but I don't think it will be long now. Maybe 10 more years and all displays we use will be that good, and then from there only holographic / 3D is left.
EDIT: according to this, the eye still has some room for growth. PPI of 526 at 20" is what we need, and some more improvement in color too.
http://wordmunger.com/?p=1348
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Personally I'm with you on the high PPI front. I've been attempting to expound the virtues of a high PPI display for a decade now. Ever since I first saw the IBM T220 in person.
However, you greatly overestimate consumer demand for such a device. As an example incredibly low DPI and hence extremely large pixel 27" (1920x1080 or 1920x1200) displays are still far more attractive to consumers than 27" high PPI (2560x1440) monitors. Why? Cost. Those 1920x1080 27" panels are also used on TV sets. Hence they are incredibly cheap to manufacture (economies of scale) than the niche 2560x1440 resolution 27" panels. It's the same reason 1920x1200 monitors are so much more expensive than 1920x1080 monitors. Even the recent price breakthrough with eIPS lowering the price of good 1920x1200 monitors it still commands a significant price premium over a monitor that can use the same LCD panel as a TV set.
Price is, as always the great motivator for purchasing for the majority of people. Apple and mobile devices won't be what pushes down the cost of manufacture and hence the cost to consumers of high PPI large screen monitors. It's the TV manufacturer's who will be pushing high PPI panels on 4k TV's that might potentiall make large screen high DPI monitors affordable to the masses.
Regards,
SB
Well, according to Ars Techinca, OSX 10.8 has double sized icons suggesting that we may see high density displays in the Mac lineup in the near future. So maybe I'll get my wish of a 3840x2160 monitor in this decade.
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2...oint-to-retina-display-coming-this-summer.ars
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2...oint-to-retina-display-coming-this-summer.ars
I disagree Im betting we're gonna see cheapish 250+ ppi devices this year (we wont be seeing tv's) just cause whatever apple dictates everyone else follows
I actually would buy a ipad to use as a monitor (if it was possible I looked & I dont think it is)
true it might seem crazy to have it ~30cms from my eyes, but atm I need to wear glasses to view my monitor at ipad3 distance I dont need glasses!
If you own a Mac it is... There's an app that turns an iPad into an external monitor for OSX. If you have the new iPad and run OSX Lion, you even get high-DPI support.
Presumably it'll be fairly slow graphics since it's a USB connection between the two devices, but it seems to work anyhow. Not sure if the GPU in the iPad is being used for anything, or if it just treats the entire iPad as a dumb framebuffer.
The "Air Display" app does support Windows. However, it's fairly expensive (US$9.99) and I don't know how well it works (on MacOS X or on Windows).
I have to admit I'm fairly tempted to get the new iPad, and a big reason is the new screen resolution ... will have a look see in the store today or tomorrow, and see how much I like it. We don't really have the money, but it is awfully tempting anyway and while I would personally still like an Android and probably could hold out of it, the truth is I'd want something for my wife and my 3yo son for educational games and youtube type stuff, and as my wife and I also have an iPhone I think that would be easier for now. We can always get an Android (or Windows 8) tablet by the time the dust settles for that in two years time.
Pcchen:
I didn't know it supports windows as well. Thanks for the infos! That's really cool to hear. Guess you'd need windows 8 to handle the massive increase in DPI though, or you'd end up squinting at the tiny text and on-screen widgets on such a small, high-res screen... $10 for such a piece of software isn't terribly onerous IMO; if it'd been $100, then yeah. I'd agree with you.
Arwin:
I'd love to have the iPad as an eBook reader (I don't buy nearly enough books I'm afraid and maybe not having to juggle heavy lumps of paper in my hands would encourage me to get back to my favorite childhood hobby), but I can't justify the expense unfortunately. It doesn't help that the graphics doesn't really keep up with the massive screen resolution either, although that only really applies to gaming, which I don't think I would do much of on an iPad anyway.
I guess next generation, when Apple's shrunk the tech some more, fixed certain teething problems (heat, wifi reception and whatnot) and boosted performance using 2x nm fabbing then the retina iPad will really be a force to be reckoned with. Right now the tech feels somewhat immature, kind of like with the original iPad, where the A4 CPU struggled with the much higher-res screen compared to iPhone.
I didn't know it supports windows as well. Thanks for the infos! That's really cool to hear. Guess you'd need windows 8 to handle the massive increase in DPI though, or you'd end up squinting at the tiny text and on-screen widgets on such a small, high-res screen... $10 for such a piece of software isn't terribly onerous IMO; if it'd been $100, then yeah. I'd agree with you.
Arwin:
I'd love to have the iPad as an eBook reader (I don't buy nearly enough books I'm afraid and maybe not having to juggle heavy lumps of paper in my hands would encourage me to get back to my favorite childhood hobby), but I can't justify the expense unfortunately. It doesn't help that the graphics doesn't really keep up with the massive screen resolution either, although that only really applies to gaming, which I don't think I would do much of on an iPad anyway.
I guess next generation, when Apple's shrunk the tech some more, fixed certain teething problems (heat, wifi reception and whatnot) and boosted performance using 2x nm fabbing then the retina iPad will really be a force to be reckoned with. Right now the tech feels somewhat immature, kind of like with the original iPad, where the A4 CPU struggled with the much higher-res screen compared to iPhone.
Last edited by a moderator:
I´ve had an apple cinema hd 30" lcd (2560x1600) for well over 5 years now and I am very, very surprised most of people are still stuck with 1080p monitors. Well, there is more in the market of 30" monitors now but they are still expensive. In fact, the exact model I have is still selling for more than I originally bought it for... which is insane.
Just for e-reading I would still recommend getting the latest e-ink Kindle or something like that. Works much nicer for that. I would like the iPad for reading the newspaper digitally. The newspaper where I live arrives around 12:30 on Saturday, while my window for reading it is usually between 09:00-11:30. I tried it on our company iPad 2 and it already works quite well there, but the text should look waaaay better on the screen.
Of course that's just one of many things.
Will definitely have a look tonight.
Of course that's just one of many things.
Will definitely have a look tonight.
Indeed. Backlit LCD is rather horrible for longer reading sessions, not to mention the lack of page turning physical keys being very cumbersome.
lets not forget that outside a backlit lcd is unreadable.
The new nook simple touch is extremely small , i don't know about th enew kindles. I bet we get another e-ink refresh of both platforms later this year and they should get even skinner.
Blazkowicz
Legend
hey, these days I'm wanting a ssh phone. i.e. a kind of cell phone with keyboard, or looking like an old-style organizer, with a cheap 3G only SIM.
the killer application would be troubleshooting servers, getting to a GNU screen session with a persistent IRC chat and the like, from the street.
(from wifi I would access files on my hard drives, again through ssh)
mass produced high dpi display, even a few inches wide, would be perfect for that!
e-ink is great but single purpose, I might as well have a terminal that prints the command line as was done 40 years or so ago
the killer application would be troubleshooting servers, getting to a GNU screen session with a persistent IRC chat and the like, from the street.
(from wifi I would access files on my hard drives, again through ssh)
mass produced high dpi display, even a few inches wide, would be perfect for that!
e-ink is great but single purpose, I might as well have a terminal that prints the command line as was done 40 years or so ago
I'm doing that quite frequently with N950, too bad Nokia decided not to sell it in shops.
Similar threads
- Deleted member 13524
- PC Purchasing Help
