I just saw the iPhone 4 display today and it's incredible how razor sharp it is. Any chance they'd put the same pixel/inch LCD's in their displays?
I wish that it were released tomorrow. However, a display with pixel density this high would probably be best used with a true resolution-independent UI. The GUI in MacOS X 10.6 gives hints that this may come sooner than later.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sc_markt
I wonder how a flat screen TV would look with as many pixels?
Such an LCD panel would make a 1920x1080 HD panel of 6.75 in. diagonal measure. This would be the perfect display for a handheld Blu-ray Disc player. Even a 4k digital cinema display would be only 12.5 in. wide. As a TV display, however, a retina flatpanel would be massive overkill. The maximum pixel density of HDTV is 1920x1080. When you sit at the recommended distance from the display, its pixels disappear already. Using a larger number of smaller pixels will not enhance the HD experience.
Even if they could make a screen that large and that dense, it would likely cost multiple $100,000.
IBM had a 22" monitor with 204 ppi...IBM T221. It looked fantastic and the rebadged ones (Viewsonic and others) ended up costing around $6k before it was discontinued in 2005. 3840x2400.
326 DPI range is pretty tough on yield and your GPU. Probably $20K range. It really depends on yield and how many they make.
IBM had a 22" monitor with 204 ppi...IBM T221. It looked fantastic and the rebadged ones (Viewsonic and others) ended up costing around $6k before it was discontinued in 2005. 3840x2400.
326 DPI range is pretty tough on yield and your GPU. Probably $20K range. It really depends on yield and how many they make.
Yeah. I may have exaggerated but I was actually responding to the part about having a flat screen tv at that resolution. My flat screen is 42" and I consider it on the small side. A 50"+ TV at that resolution would be pretty amazing except you could never find anything to watch that would take advantage of the resolution.
Any chance the next version of the ipod touch has the same screen pixels/inch as the new iphone? I don't need another ipod but I'd find it hard to not buy one. Especially if it has this fast processor in it.
IBM had a 22" monitor with 204 ppi...IBM T221. It looked fantastic and the rebadged ones (Viewsonic and others) ended up costing around $6k before it was discontinued in 2005. 3840x2400.
326 DPI range is pretty tough on yield and your GPU. Probably $20K range. It really depends on yield and how many they make.
Not sure what they run now, but $20K is probably conservative. In 2002, 300dpi monitors ran $300,000 apiece as part of a special run for Livermore Labs visualization center, I think they were ~27".
If the eye stops at 300dpi from a foot away then I really couldn't see the point in a display with 362dpi, the eye wouldn't be able to see a quarter of them without binoculars. And I can't imagine how long it would take to download movies
Not sure what they run now, but $20K is probably conservative. In 2002, 300dpi monitors ran $300,000 apiece as part of a special run for Livermore Labs visualization center, I think they were ~27".
And how much did 64GB of solid state storage (like that in the iPod Touch) cost in 2002?
And how much did 64GB of solid state storage (like that in the iPod Touch) cost in 2002?
We all understand that the prices of electronic components drop over time. We also understand that a 326 dpi 40" flatscreen TV display would have a pixel count of 11,365 x 6393 or approximately 73 megapixels. "Massive overkill" doesn't even begin to describe it.
We all understand that the prices of electronic components drop over time. We also understand that a 326 dpi 40" flatscreen TV display would have a pixel count of 11,365 x 6393 or approximately 73 megapixels. "Massive overkill" doesn't even begin to describe it.
Heh...I'd like to see the Mini design that can drive 11Kx6K at more than .1 fps...
Obviously DPI is one important aspect to reading text on an iPhone or iPad, but isn't contrast ration another important factor? I seem to remember reading some time ago that the main reason it is easier to read printed text is the high contrast ratio, not the size of the dots.
Obviously DPI is one important aspect to reading text on an iPhone or iPad, but isn't contrast ration another important factor? I seem to remember reading some time ago that the main reason it is easier to read printed text is the high contrast ratio, not the size of the dots.
You need both. Make either one better and it gets easier to read. Make either worse and it gets harder. The Retina Display is radically better than the 3G/GS display in both.
Comments
I just saw the iPhone 4 display today and it's incredible how razor sharp it is. Any chance they'd put the same pixel/inch LCD's in their displays?
I wish that it were released tomorrow. However, a display with pixel density this high would probably be best used with a true resolution-independent UI. The GUI in MacOS X 10.6 gives hints that this may come sooner than later.
I wonder how a flat screen TV would look with as many pixels?
Such an LCD panel would make a 1920x1080 HD panel of 6.75 in. diagonal measure. This would be the perfect display for a handheld Blu-ray Disc player. Even a 4k digital cinema display would be only 12.5 in. wide. As a TV display, however, a retina flatpanel would be massive overkill. The maximum pixel density of HDTV is 1920x1080. When you sit at the recommended distance from the display, its pixels disappear already. Using a larger number of smaller pixels will not enhance the HD experience.
Even if they could make a screen that large and that dense, it would likely cost multiple $100,000.
IBM had a 22" monitor with 204 ppi...IBM T221. It looked fantastic and the rebadged ones (Viewsonic and others) ended up costing around $6k before it was discontinued in 2005. 3840x2400.
326 DPI range is pretty tough on yield and your GPU. Probably $20K range. It really depends on yield and how many they make.
IBM had a 22" monitor with 204 ppi...IBM T221. It looked fantastic and the rebadged ones (Viewsonic and others) ended up costing around $6k before it was discontinued in 2005. 3840x2400.
326 DPI range is pretty tough on yield and your GPU. Probably $20K range. It really depends on yield and how many they make.
Yeah. I may have exaggerated but I was actually responding to the part about having a flat screen tv at that resolution. My flat screen is 42" and I consider it on the small side. A 50"+ TV at that resolution would be pretty amazing except you could never find anything to watch that would take advantage of the resolution.
IBM had a 22" monitor with 204 ppi...IBM T221. It looked fantastic and the rebadged ones (Viewsonic and others) ended up costing around $6k before it was discontinued in 2005. 3840x2400.
326 DPI range is pretty tough on yield and your GPU. Probably $20K range. It really depends on yield and how many they make.
Not sure what they run now, but $20K is probably conservative. In 2002, 300dpi monitors ran $300,000 apiece as part of a special run for Livermore Labs visualization center, I think they were ~27".
~Callum
Not sure what they run now, but $20K is probably conservative. In 2002, 300dpi monitors ran $300,000 apiece as part of a special run for Livermore Labs visualization center, I think they were ~27".
And how much did 64GB of solid state storage (like that in the iPod Touch) cost in 2002?
And how much did 64GB of solid state storage (like that in the iPod Touch) cost in 2002?
We all understand that the prices of electronic components drop over time. We also understand that a 326 dpi 40" flatscreen TV display would have a pixel count of 11,365 x 6393 or approximately 73 megapixels. "Massive overkill" doesn't even begin to describe it.
And how much did 64GB of solid state storage (like that in the iPod Touch) cost in 2002?
Well, in the mid '90s you could get 400MB of carrier qualified solid state storage for about $120,000.
We all understand that the prices of electronic components drop over time. We also understand that a 326 dpi 40" flatscreen TV display would have a pixel count of 11,365 x 6393 or approximately 73 megapixels. "Massive overkill" doesn't even begin to describe it.
Heh...I'd like to see the Mini design that can drive 11Kx6K at more than .1 fps...
Obviously DPI is one important aspect to reading text on an iPhone or iPad, but isn't contrast ration another important factor? I seem to remember reading some time ago that the main reason it is easier to read printed text is the high contrast ratio, not the size of the dots.
You need both. Make either one better and it gets easier to read. Make either worse and it gets harder. The Retina Display is radically better than the 3G/GS display in both.