Apple's iPhone 4 "Retina" display claims spark controversy
In the wake of Monday's iPhone 4 introduction, Apple has been the target of sharp criticism from some industry watchers and rivals looking to dispute some of the claims it made regarding the handset's new Retina Display.
Apple says new display sports four times as many pixels as that of the existing iPhone 3GS, with a resolution of 960x640, 326 pixels per inch, and backed by the same advanced IPS (In-Plane Switching) technology used in the iPad. During his keynote presentation at the company's annual developers conference, chief executive Steve Jobs asserted that the resolution of the new display was higher than "the limit of the human retina," which he noted as 300 ppi at 10- to 12-inches away.
In response to this, display expert Dr. Raymond Soneira, president of DisplayMate Technologies, contributed to an article over at PC World rebutting the claim. AppleInsider has previously referenced Soneira's extensive display critiques of both the Nexus One and the iPhone 3GS. In his most recent analysis, Soneira claims that the actual distinguishable resolution of the human retina is 477 ppi at a distance of 12 inches. According to his calculations, the iPhone 4's display wouldn't be a true retina display unless it was designed to be held at a distance of at least 18 inches from the eye, much farther than standard use for a mobile handset.
Soneira's comments were picked up by several major news outlets, including Reuters, Fox News and Wired, some of which expanded on those claims to accuse Apple of false advertising.
As numerous blogs sites continued coverage of the matter, some of the facts became further distorted, causing an eventual backlash against the criticism of false marketing. Discover Magazine blogger Phil Plait, who previously worked on the Hubble Telescope, sided with Apple by noting that Soneira's math assumes perfect eyesight, whereas the average person would be unable to distinguish the iPhone's pixels at a distance of a foot.
Jobs' WWDC keynote also drew criticism for the use of comparison graphics between the iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4 displays that some pundits have similarly deemed as misleading. Digital Society, a non-profit think tank, alleged that Jobs during the keynote falsely propped the iPhone 4's dispay with graphics that show an iPhone 4 resolution as high as 815 ppi, and up to 489 ppi on a separate Apple advertisement.
Adding to the controversy was global electronics maker Samsung, who joined the conversation by touting its AMOLED technology, which will be used in its recently announced Galaxy S, as superior to the newly released Retina Display. A spokesperson for the electronics maker told The Korea Herald that although the iPhone has a higher resolution, "visibility difference is only 3 to 5 percent," while consuming significantly more power than its own technology.
The LCD-IPS display used in the iPhone 4 is manufactured by LG, one of Samsung's primary rivals. For its part, research firm iSuppli believes that the competition between Apple and Google is bound spill over into a battle between LCD-IPS displays and AMOLED displays. Vinita Jakhanwal, a principal analyst for the firm, similarly sided with Apple, saying that while the Nexus One "upped the ante" for handset displays with its AMOLED display, the iPhone 4 "has raised the bar even further" with its LCD-IPS Retina display.
Apple says new display sports four times as many pixels as that of the existing iPhone 3GS, with a resolution of 960x640, 326 pixels per inch, and backed by the same advanced IPS (In-Plane Switching) technology used in the iPad. During his keynote presentation at the company's annual developers conference, chief executive Steve Jobs asserted that the resolution of the new display was higher than "the limit of the human retina," which he noted as 300 ppi at 10- to 12-inches away.
In response to this, display expert Dr. Raymond Soneira, president of DisplayMate Technologies, contributed to an article over at PC World rebutting the claim. AppleInsider has previously referenced Soneira's extensive display critiques of both the Nexus One and the iPhone 3GS. In his most recent analysis, Soneira claims that the actual distinguishable resolution of the human retina is 477 ppi at a distance of 12 inches. According to his calculations, the iPhone 4's display wouldn't be a true retina display unless it was designed to be held at a distance of at least 18 inches from the eye, much farther than standard use for a mobile handset.
Soneira's comments were picked up by several major news outlets, including Reuters, Fox News and Wired, some of which expanded on those claims to accuse Apple of false advertising.
As numerous blogs sites continued coverage of the matter, some of the facts became further distorted, causing an eventual backlash against the criticism of false marketing. Discover Magazine blogger Phil Plait, who previously worked on the Hubble Telescope, sided with Apple by noting that Soneira's math assumes perfect eyesight, whereas the average person would be unable to distinguish the iPhone's pixels at a distance of a foot.
Jobs' WWDC keynote also drew criticism for the use of comparison graphics between the iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4 displays that some pundits have similarly deemed as misleading. Digital Society, a non-profit think tank, alleged that Jobs during the keynote falsely propped the iPhone 4's dispay with graphics that show an iPhone 4 resolution as high as 815 ppi, and up to 489 ppi on a separate Apple advertisement.
Adding to the controversy was global electronics maker Samsung, who joined the conversation by touting its AMOLED technology, which will be used in its recently announced Galaxy S, as superior to the newly released Retina Display. A spokesperson for the electronics maker told The Korea Herald that although the iPhone has a higher resolution, "visibility difference is only 3 to 5 percent," while consuming significantly more power than its own technology.
The LCD-IPS display used in the iPhone 4 is manufactured by LG, one of Samsung's primary rivals. For its part, research firm iSuppli believes that the competition between Apple and Google is bound spill over into a battle between LCD-IPS displays and AMOLED displays. Vinita Jakhanwal, a principal analyst for the firm, similarly sided with Apple, saying that while the Nexus One "upped the ante" for handset displays with its AMOLED display, the iPhone 4 "has raised the bar even further" with its LCD-IPS Retina display.
Comments
In the wake of Monday's iPhone 4 introduction, Apple has been the target of sharp criticism from some industry watchers and rivals looking to dispute some of the claims it made regarding the handset's new Retina Display....
This article is total click-bait, considering these claims are both old and already dealt with by multiple other outlets many times over. It's also a classic "tempest in a teapot."
The bottom line is that Apple used a bit of marketing double-speak but technically, everything they said is still (more or less) true. Also, the entire argument is between "specialists" and has no bearing on the average person's view of the display or the phone.
The average person reading/listening to Apple's marketing will get that the new display is "fantastic" and "better than the rest." In a few weeks the phone will be in their hands and the verdict from the public will be that it's ... "fantastic" and "better than the rest."
After that, no one will give a hoot what some scientists argument about the "true" resolution of the iPhone 4 versus the human eyeball is and whether it's 12 inches from your face, or 18.
This article is total click-bait, considering these claims are both old and already dealt with by multiple other outlets many times over. It's also a classic "tempest in a teapot."
The bottom line is that Apple used a bit of marketing double-speak but technically, everything they said is still (more or less) true. Also, the entire argument is between "specialists" and has no bearing on the average person's view of the display or the phone.
The average person reading/listening to Apple's marketing will get that the new display is "fantastic" and "better than the rest." In a few weeks the phone will be in their hands and the verdict from the public will be that it's ... "fantastic" and "better than the rest."
After that, no one will give a hoot what some scientists argument about the "true" resolution of the iPhone 4 versus the human eyeball is and whether it's 12 inches from your face, or 18.
Exactly.
They can say this now, but they won?t be able to say such things and be taken seriously after the iPhone 4 is released and people have seen it in person. Until they figure out a way to make AMOLED visible in daylight, they?re not even in the game.
Sounds similar to claims made by Audio Experts about Fidelity in Stereo Systems
Which, like this, is useless since most Folks can't hear worth a damn, and are blind
.
But know this much is True
We can all "see" the iPhone has the Wannabes scared chitless
Even with no pixels per inch
.
I find it interesting that AI wasn't so diligent in finding a counter to Soneira's false claims about the inadequacies of the Nexus One screen, as the have been when his negative comments concerned the iPhone.
Also take a ruler and put the end between your eyes.. then hold your phone at the 12 inch mark.. ya does ANYONE actually use it this close to their face?? (apart from people who won't admit they need glasses)
Honestly 18" sounds about right.. and clearly SJ wasn't 100% on those figures during the keynote when he was saying "err..uhh.. around 12 or 14 inches or so."
...which is one reason I'm upgrading in a few weeks.
Add a couple of finger smears on the screen on a sunny day and this all becomes even more irrelevant.
This article is total click-bait, considering these claims are both old and already dealt with by multiple other outlets many times over. It's also a classic "tempest in a teapot."
The bottom line is that Apple used a bit of marketing double-speak but technically, everything they said is still (more or less) true. Also, the entire argument is between "specialists" and has no bearing on the average person's view of the display or the phone.
The average person reading/listening to Apple's marketing will get that the new display is "fantastic" and "better than the rest." In a few weeks the phone will be in their hands and the verdict from the public will be that it's ... "fantastic" and "better than the rest."
After that, no one will give a hoot what some scientists argument about the "true" resolution of the iPhone 4 versus the human eyeball is and whether it's 12 inches from your face, or 18.
Well put. My sentiments exactly.
Jeez! Unbelievable... Marketing exaggeration has been around forever.
http://www.engadget.com/2010/06/10/i...th-microscope/
I think Gruber's response to this pretty much says it all:
They can say this now, but they won?t be able to say such things and be taken seriously after the iPhone 4 is released and people have seen it in person. Until they figure out a way to make AMOLED visible in daylight, they?re not even in the game.
No, I don't think his comment is anymore accurate than Soniera's
AMOLED screens are infamous for their poor performance in direct sunlight though, so we took the Samsung Wave out for a stroll out in the sun with an iPhone, which uses a standard LCD TFT, to see how they compare.
When not in sunlight, the Wave shames the iPhone in contrast terms ? blacks are so much blacker on the Super AMOLED screen ? but in sunlight reflectivity is noticeably better on the iPhone. It?s not a deal breaker though, especially when you can switch on the Wave?s Outdoor Visibility mode.
Outdoor Visibility cranks up colour saturation, and while it looks absolutely hideous when you?re indoors, it does the trick when out in the sun. This mode is available in the Wave?s features that rely most on screen visibility, such as the video player and camera.
http://188.65.36.75/2010/05/21/samsu...ds-on-preview/
But I do tend to follow Jobs' statement of the threshold based on my printing experience. 300ppi is roughly the same as 150 line print.
No, I don't think his comment is anymore accurate than Soniera's
Well, actually, I just meant the first sentence, but carelessly forgot to edit the second out. My mistake.
... Also take a ruler and put the end between your eyes.. then hold your phone at the 12 inch mark.. ya does ANYONE actually use it this close to their face?? (apart from people who won't admit they need glasses) ...
Actually, people who need that type of glasses will likely hold it even further away.