or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Limited supply reportedly keeps AMOLED from Apple's next-gen iPad
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Limited supply reportedly keeps AMOLED from Apple's next-gen iPad

post #1 of 30
Thread Starter 
Casting even more doubt on the prospect of an active-matrix organic LED display in Apple's anticipated second-generation iPad, a new report claims that limited component supplies have been a "major reason" for Apple to overlook the technology.

In an editorial posted Friday by Taiwanese industry publication DigiTimes, Rebecca Kuo said that component makers in Taiwan and China are attempting to catch up with Korea, which is the leader in AMOLED displays. Though suppliers are increasing their production, she said it still isn't enough for Apple.

"With backlight unit (BLU) makers set to be suppliers for the second generation of iPad, AMOLED will still be unable to enter Apple's supply chain," she said. "Panel makers have noted that a major reason for Apple to overlook AMOLED for iPads is insufficient supplies."

Korea-based Samsung Mobile Display currently creates AMOLED panels between 2 inches and 4.2 inches, but its capacity is allegedly not enough to meet demand for the Samsung Galaxy S, Google Nexus S, or other phones from Nokia and HTC.

"Moreover, the current AMOLED technology is not suitable for volume production of 7- to 11-inch tablet PC panels, and the mass production cost will not be able to compete with TFT-LCD panels," Kuo wrote.

The details come just after the same publication claimed that an LCD backlight supplier has been selected for Apple's second-generation iPad expected to debut in the first quarter of 2011. DigiTimes has claimed that Apple experimented with an AMOLED display for the iPhone, but ultimately rejected the hardware because it was less suitable for displaying text, and because of display issues.

Rumors of an iPad with an AMOLED display, mostly perpetuated by DigiTimes itself, were repeated for months. The site also incorrectly reported in Nov. 2009 that Apple's not-yet-announced iPad would have an OLED display that would cost about $2,000 at retail.
post #2 of 30
Hooray for a statement about a rumor that was never going to happen in the first place!

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #3 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Hooray for a statement about a rumor that was never going to happen in the first place!

Indeed. What a waste of space this article is. The article it's based on is obviously just a puff-piece in itself.

Why would Apple even be considering using AMOLED displays, in what is arguably it's flagship product, when they've spent the last few years telling everyone what sh*t the technology is and when they are currently using top of the line IPS panels in *all* their products? The panels they are using now are demonstrably cheaper, brighter, more readable, and have more accurate colour than AMOLED.
post #4 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Hooray for a statement about a rumor that was never going to happen in the first place!

In other news, Apple decides to pass on Android as the OS on the next-gen iPad!
post #5 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Hooray for a statement about a rumor that was never going to happen in the first place!

Seriously! These rumours should all blame it on the Verizon iPhone just to round everything out.

Quote:
Verizon iPhone is limiting supply of AMOLED for Apple's next-gen iPad

Makes just as much sense as this article’s rumour.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #6 of 30
Anybody have a good, recent link re active-matrix organic LEDs? I've seen some, but years ago. I'd like to see what the state-of-the-art is, and why (or if?) it's actually desirable to put one in an iPad (someday).
post #7 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister Snitch View Post

Anybody have a good, recent link re active-matrix organic LEDs? I've seen some, but years ago. I'd like to see what the state-of-the-art is, and why (or if?) it's actually desirable to put one in an iPad (someday).

I've seen and used some in some recent devices and all in all I really cannot understand why the product is so successful. They're improving is the kindest thing I can say. I would rather the money went to other cool toys inside the device for the time being, but then again, it is this sort of market interest in a product which allows it to evolve.
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
The true measure of a man is how he treats someone that can do him absolutely no good.
  Samuel Johnson
Reply
post #8 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister Snitch View Post

Anybody have a good, recent link re active-matrix organic LEDs? I've seen some, but years ago. I'd like to see what the state-of-the-art is, and why (or if?) it's actually desirable to put one in an iPad (someday).

As Xian Zhu Xuande states, they are improving. I think they are used to separate themselves from the iPhone and because it’s a more marketable term, despite it’s total capabilities. There is plenty of info if you do a search, but no single site is likely to address all your questions. Here is a very recent article from AnandTech that tests and compares the Nexus S and it’s Super AMOLED display against other smartphones.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4059/n...the-holidays/4 Outside of appearance, there are concerns about longevity, outside viewing, power usage when not showing blacks, supply constraints (which alone could make it a no go if the rumours are true), and cost for that size device.

I can’t imagine Apple choose a 10” IPS display without thinking about the longterm. On top of that, the one area where the iPad can be faulted is outside viewing when compared to eInk — as Amazon’s brilliant Kindle ads detail — so I can’t imagine Apple would take a step backwards with viewing in sunlight.

PS: I still hope Apple invests in AMOLED panels for their Mac trackpads.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #9 of 30
These rumors must have a long tail. There is no way this decision was made, let's say, in the last 6 months, assuming that such an iPad is due to be released in January.

Or is there?

Apple is known for making last minute manufacturing decisions to respond to changing market dynamics.
post #10 of 30
.
http://www.gsmarena.com/display_shootout-review-541.php

I have a Samsung Wave which has a Super AMOLED display. Those who have not lived with a screen of this calibre for some time are simply fooling themselves if they think anything else is as good.

The Wave screen is actually slightly better than the Galaxy S because it has the same resolution but since the screen is smaller - 84mm vs 100mm - the pixel pitch is smaller making it appear slightly sharper. I am surprised the article did not pick up on this.
post #11 of 30
I'd love to see a combination of Samsung's super AMOLED, and Apple's retina display. Amazing contrast with very sharp images.
post #12 of 30
Just tell me the next iPad will have a retina display and i'll be happy.
post #13 of 30
#2, #3, #4, and #5:

What you said!

I do wish that ApoleIncider would add those "like/dislike" badges to their posts. OTOH they're probably afraid of what they might see. It's articles like the above that would generate lots of dislikes and very few likes. If they paid attention, perhaps there would be a shift in what actually gets posted.
post #14 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtm135 View Post

Just tell me the next iPad will have a retina display and i'll be happy.

Sure: The next iPad will have a retina display. Happy?

So now that we have that out of the way, how do you define Retina Display? It could mean many things. The top definitions are:
  1. PPI that is ≥ the iPhone 4s 326 PPI?
  2. PPI that that is ≥ what is needed for the 1 arcmin for the typical eyesight (i.e.: 20/20 vision) for a stated typical viewing distance?
  3. 4x the number the of pixels (aka doubling the resolution, like with the 3GS to the iPhone 4)? (Note: this would give the iPad 262 PPI).

The point is, this marketing term needs to be qualified.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #15 of 30
There are no 10" AMOLED displays available, Samsung couldn't even come up with one for their 7" Galaxy Tab, the manufacturing process just isn't up to it yet.

Regarding the colour my subjective view is that AMOLEDS are overly bright, like a TV with the colour turned too high, the reds especially seem to bleed into the surrounding background.

I prefer the iPhone 4 screen the colour seems more natural and text is definitely sharper.

There is no accounting for taste, flouro velvet Elvis pictures were once quite popular, I'd imagine that AMOLED screens would look good to the same type of people.
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #16 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

The point is, this marketing term needs to be qualified.

But people don't care, they just want a Retina display and they define it as both a ppi > 300 (or alternatively 326) and 4x doubling of the existing resolution (or rather they want perfect app compatibility) and no change in the physical size of the iPad. And if you tell them this is not possible, they will answer you that if Apple really wants it, they can do it.

(It is called 'irrationalism' or 'anti-intellectualism', to not let facts and logic get into the way of what feels right.)
post #17 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

Indeed. What a waste of space this article is. The article it's based on is obviously just a puff-piece in itself.

Why would Apple even be considering using AMOLED displays, in what is arguably it's flagship product, when they've spent the last few years telling everyone what sh*t the technology is and when they are currently using top of the line IPS panels in *all* their products? The panels they are using now are demonstrably cheaper, brighter, more readable, and have more accurate colour than AMOLED.

The iPod Touch does not have IPS,
post #18 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

...they are currently using top of the line IPS panels in *all* their products?

Not the MacBook family, that's for DARN sure.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #19 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Sure: The next iPad will have a retina display. Happy?

So now that we have that out of the way, how do you define Retina Display? It could mean many things. The top definitions are:
  1. PPI that is ≥ the iPhone 4s 326 PPI?
  2. PPI that that is ≥ what is needed for the 1 arcmin for the typical eyesight (i.e.: 20/20 vision) for a stated typical viewing distance?
  3. 4x the number the of pixels (aka doubling the resolution, like with the 3GS to the iPhone 4)? (Note: this would give the iPad 262 PPI).

The point is, this marketing term needs to be qualified.

Marketing it is. In any event doubling the linear resolution for 4x the number of pixels does it for me. That is still a huge problem on the hardware front though but hopefully that is what Apple is paying all thoose hardware engineers for.
post #20 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Marketing it is. In any event doubling the linear resolution for 4x the number of pixels does it for me. That is still a huge problem on the hardware front though but hopefully that is what Apple is paying all thoose hardware engineers for.

Note that doubling the resolution (4x the pixels) would likely make it qualify for Retina Display status for 1 arcmin if we assume the iPad is held farther away from the eyes as a phone for normal use. (Im not going to do the math, but I encourage others to prove me right or wrong )

I think 4x as many pixels would be pretty tough on the GPU, perhaps to the point of killing the framerates of games and killing the battery way too quickly. Maybe in a couple years, but nothing from Imagination which I assume Apple will keep using since they are vested in them seems to show a dramatic improvement to make this happen.

On top of that, if they cant produce enough of the current 1024x768 IPS displays, it seems unlikely they could produce enough 2048x1536 IPS displays. Maybe in a couple years.

BTW, staying with the current resolution is not my wish. I do hope Im wrong and we get a super high resolution without any perceived drawbacks, I just dont think its likely. Apple could do a fractional resolution increase with minimal affect on devs with an SDK update, but they didnt with the iPhone which still had the original resolution for three full years so precedence needs to be considered.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #21 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by noirdesir View Post

But people don't care, they just want a Retina display and they define it as both a ppi > 300 (or alternatively 326) and 4x doubling of the existing resolution (or rather they want perfect app compatibility) and no change in the physical size of the iPad.

Not everyone has the technical expertise to quantify exactly what they want. It is better to accept that they simplly want a better display and use the term "Retina" to express that.
Quote:
And if you tell them this is not possible, they will answer you that if Apple really wants it, they can do it.

Let's be clear on one thing if you tell them it isn't possible the you are obviously out of touch with the technology going into current devices. For example hitting greater than 300 pixels per inch in mass production screens is now possible, iPhone 4 proves that. So it is now nothing more than a scaling up effort for a ten inch screen. Since that ten inch screen will most rationally only be scaled by 2X you don't even need 300 ppi. So the physical screen is not an issue.

Then you have the issue of the A4 and it's suitability to drive such a screen. Simply put it isn't suitable simply due to the performance hit. However again we have this craft called engineering which builds solutions to problems. Apple is known to be actively working on an A4 replacement directed at the tablet devices combine that reality with the fact that better IP is available from both ARM and Imagination and support from the SoC side is not impossible.

The problem I have with your position is that it seems to imply it is impossible to build on the past. This flies in the face of what the computer industry has done iver it's long history.
Quote:
(It is called 'irrationalism' or 'anti-intellectualism', to not let facts and logic get into the way of what feels right.)

So what do they call what you have done here? Seriously you present a pseudo intellectual arguement that ignores history and fact. Little facts like the GPU in A4s SoC not being Imaginations bleeding edge or the fact that Apple purchased whole companies just to have the IP to produce the SoCs they will need to have for their mobile devices. On top of that you have no evidence at all that it is impossible to produce a ten inch LCD at around 260 ppi.

I really don't know what Apple is up to with iPad 2 but I do know that saying something is impossible when all of the components to do so are only a rev away doesn't fly.
post #22 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

It is better to accept that they simplly want a better display and use the term "Retina" to express that.

No it isnt. Its either saucer-eyed delusion or ignorance of what the term describes. If we use the first three iPhones as examples, chances are the display will be better than the previous years model even if they keep the resolution the same. So it fails on two levels.


Quote:
Let's be clear on one thing if you tell them it isn't possible the you are obviously out of touch with the technology going into current devices. For example hitting greater than 300 pixels per inch in mass production screens is now possible, iPhone 4 proves that. So it is now nothing more than a scaling up effort for a ten inch screen. Since that ten inch screen will most rationally only be scaled by 2X you don't even need 300 ppi. So the physical screen is not an issue.

Perhaps feasible or viable would have been a better choice of wording over possible ut I think his comment is clear.

Not that the iPhone 4 display is 3.5. To make the iPad display 326ppi do you think that its possible to use the same GPU as in the iPhone 4 (and in the iPad). But they both have Retina Displays so they both should work just fine¡ Thats not the reality. And even if you get a GPU that will work how well will it work and how much of a hit will the battery life take to run it. Unless you have some evidence to support this as possible for a shipping product Id say its not possible for a shipping product.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #23 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Note that doubling the resolution (4x the pixels) would likely make it qualify for Retina Display status for 1 arcmin if we assume the iPad is held farther away from the eyes as a phone for normal use. (Im not going to do the math, but I encourage others to prove me right or wrong )

I'm an old guy so I don't get to wrapped up in things that are hard to see anyways. I just don't like seeing the word impossible used in this context. Yes it is an engineering challenge but so was the trip to the moon.
Quote:
I think 4x as many pixels would be pretty tough on the GPU, perhaps to the point of killing the framerates of games and killing the battery way too quickly.

There is no doubt that it would be tough on both the GPU and bandwidth to memory. However Samsung has already indicated that their new Cortex A9 based SoC has 4x the performance for OpenGL. That might translate into a was with respect to gaming.
Quote:
Maybe in a couple years, but nothing from Imagination which I assume Apple will keep using since they are vested in them seems to show a dramatic improvement to make this happen.

On the other hand the clock rates on the GPUs is extremely low. Last I knew someplace in the range of 300 to 400 MHz. So they might be able to boost that with a process shrink. That only if they use the current GPU core which I don't believe is likely. Imagination already has better publically announced GPUs and the likely hood is that any thing Apple is likely to use is unannounced.

I don't dismiss that the GPU is an issue just that the current core in the A4 is rather old and that processes have improved significantly. A process shrink and a better GPU could keep us in the same performance territory or even bump things a bit.
Quote:
On top of that, if they cant produce enough of the current 1024x768 IPS displays, it seems unlikely they could produce enough 2048x1536 IPS displays. Maybe in a couple years.

Well the issue of production is actually easy to address as you simply throw more money at the ptoblem. Rumors seem to support that this is Apples approach. In any event it looks like part of the problem was the result of being caught off guard by iPads success not so much technical issues.
Quote:
BTW, staying with the current resolution is not my wish. I do hope Im wrong and we get a super high resolution without any perceived drawbacks, I just dont think its likely.

It isn't a big issue for me except when I see the word impossible used. The reality is the current display isn't that bad and there are a bunch of other more glaring issues to address with respect to iPad. RAM, flash storage and general CPU performance are all bigger issues. Even things like USB and SD card support are likely more important to many.
Quote:
Apple could do a fractional resolution increase with minimal affect on devs with an SDK update, but they didnt with the iPhone which still had the original resolution for three full years so precedence needs to be considered.

Actually just about everything needed is already in iOS to support a fractional increase in resolution. The question is how closely do developers pay attention to such issues.

In any event I prefer to look at this as possible even if maybe not probable. The idea that it is impossible just rubs me the wrong way.
post #24 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Actually just about everything needed is already in iOS to support a fractional increase in resolution. The question is how closely do developers pay attention to such issues.

I recall seeing updated with Retina Display support with iPhone app updates from at least last month. I figure most have done it already but there seemed to be a delay between the iPhone 4 demo and SDK update, and developers implementing it. Still, its not like running iPhone/Touch apps on the iPad, the pre-Retina Display iPhone apps looked as good as before, they just looked better after the update so no harm, no foul.

Quote:
In any event I prefer to look at this as possible even if maybe not probable. The idea that it is impossible just rubs me the wrong way.

I cant disagree with you there. I try to not use absolutes when writing about certain things, though sometimes implied meanings and word usage can get muddled as we tend to be a bit hyperbolic at time to convey a point.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #25 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

No it isnt. Its either saucer-eyed delusion or ignorance of what the term describes. If we use the first three iPhones as examples, chances are the display will be better than the previous years model even if they keep the resolution the same. So it fails on two levels.

This really isn't a technical forum where there is a high expectation of accuracy in a persons statements. More so Retina is nothing more than a marketing creation that only has meaning in the context of Apples products. So by definition somebody can easily use it to imply a desire for a higher resolution display.
Quote:
Perhaps feasible or viable would have been a better choice of wording over possible ut I think his comment is clear.

Not that the iPhone 4 display is 3.5. To make the iPad display 326ppi do you think that its possible to use the same GPU as in the iPhone 4 (and in the iPad).

Nope not at all. Then again I don't expect iPad 2 to use that processor anyways. The A4 has to many limitations to take Apple where they want to go with iPad. Rather I'm expecting at least dual core Cortex A9 derived processors and a 4x improvement from the GPU at the least. Will that be enough? That is a good question but I believe there is enough evidence around to believe it is possible.

In any event we have to remeber this is a brand new device it is not the intallations of a high res screen in the old chassis.
Quote:
But they both have Retina Displays so they both should work just fine¡ Thats not the reality. And even if you get a GPU that will work how well will it work and how much of a hit will the battery life take to run it.

These are really good questions. Many are thinking Apples next chip will target Samsungs 32nm node which would allow for a considerable performance increase at the current power levels. However if Apple went completely bleeding edge to 22nm then we might see another 40% increase in performance at the same power levels.

In any event back up to 32nm and look at Intels and others success at this node. Intel is packing an incredible amount of circuitry on those dies and still reducing power. That is for the massive x86, Apples entire SoC is far smaller.

Obviously we can't know exactly what Apple can achieve with a new processor/SoC but the writing is on the wall. So to speak, the actual writing is at a very tiny scale. All this noise aside I think Apple can double CPU performance and more than double GPU performance in the same general power profile if they really want to.
Quote:
Unless you have some evidence to support this as possible for a shipping product Id say its not possible for a shipping product.

One simPly has to look at shipping or about to ship Cortex A9 based products from Samsung, NVidia, Qualcom and others. To justify in house development Apple has to do better than what can be had on the open market. Some of these offerings are pretty darn good.

In any event if IPad 2 doesn't ship with at keast a dual core Cortex A9 based processor I will have to question Apples leaderships sanity. How good that chip will be is obviously open for discussion. The thing is does anybody realistically expect Apple to ship iPad 2 with a single core A4 derived SoC????? Especially when there will be a flood of dual core Cortex A9 chips on the market next year with many of those chips in very nice hardware. I realize it is a bigger stretch to have the capability to drive 4x the pixels but it isn't going to be far from run of the mill performance in 2011.
post #26 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I recall seeing updated with Retina Display support with iPhone app updates from at least last month. I figure most have done it already but there seemed to be a delay between the iPhone 4 demo and SDK update, and developers implementing it. Still, its not like running iPhone/Touch apps on the iPad, the pre-Retina Display iPhone apps looked as good as before, they just looked better after the update so no harm, no foul.

Part of the issue is that some apps are in greater need of updates that others. Apps that used lots of bit maps have had real issues.
Quote:

I cant disagree with you there. I try to not use absolutes when writing about certain things, though sometimes implied meanings and word usage can get muddled as we tend to be a bit hyperbolic at time to convey a point.

I can't muddy this: I've spent to much time here today. Will check in later.
post #27 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Not everyone has the technical expertise to quantify exactly what they want. It is better to accept that they simplly want a better display and use the term "Retina" to express that.

My criticism was not directed at those that cannot express exactly what they want. It was directed at those that when told that their precise desires are not technical possible, do not have the patience to follow a simple logical explanation as to why it is not possible.

Or did you mean that not everybody has the technical expertise (instead of just simply patience) to calculate (or look up) the current ppi of the iPad, to understand (or simply read up) that the only absolutely pain-free resolution increase from a app-compatibility point of view is to replace one existing pixel with four new smaller pixels, and to then compare the double of the current iPad resolution with that what has been used by Apple as a yardstick for 'Retina' (essentially they said roughly 300+ ppi), but that everybody has the right to criticise those with the expertise to do the above as elitist?

Quote:
Let's be clear on one thing if you tell them it isn't possible the you are obviously out of touch with the technology going into current devices. For example hitting greater than 300 pixels per inch in mass production screens is now possible, iPhone 4 proves that.

Thanks for providing an example to my point (in your specific case, lack of reading comprehension). I nowhere said that a linear doubling of the resolution (ie, increase total pixel count by four) is not possible. I just remarked that people will demand 300+ ppi, perfect app compatibility (ie, the 4x), and the same physical size and unfortunately simple mathematics shows that only two of these three things are possible at the same time. But people won't even listen long enough to take that in before starting the criticism.
post #28 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by chronster View Post

I'd love to see a combination of Samsung's super AMOLED, and Apple's retina display. Amazing contrast with very sharp images.

Yeaa... I loved the deep contrast of the Samsung Galaxy something-or-other smartphone when playing with it for a few minutes. But of course Retina is stunning, like HD video in any form, you wonder how you ever watched SD. The iPhone 4 contrast, visuals, IPS panels are all top notch. A little juice from whatever it is that makes AMOLED good, mixed with iPhone 4, will be a stunning iPhone 5 screen. Or one can wish.
post #29 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Sure: The next iPad will have a retina display. Happy?

So now that we have that out of the way, how do you define Retina Display? It could mean many things. The top definitions are:
  1. PPI that is ≥ the iPhone 4’s 326 PPI?
  2. PPI that that is ≥ what is needed for the 1 arcmin for the typical eyesight (i.e.: 20/20 vision) for a stated typical viewing distance?
  3. 4x the number the of pixels (aka doubling the resolution, like with the 3GS to the iPhone 4)? (Note: this would give the iPad 262 PPI).

The point is, this marketing term needs to be qualified.

I was thinking for several months now, there will be two classes of display - Retina will be the smartphone standard, OK.

Now for iPad, 1024x768 would have to be beefed up in the easiest way to 2048 x 1536. This won't be Retina, but Apple could always come up with a new term for it. It's just marketing, as you allude to somewhat... Here's some of my brainstorming:

Cornea Display
Eyeball Display
Eyesight
Eyetangent
Eyes
BlackGradient
RainDisplay
RainGuard
NerveDisplay
EyeNerve
Optic Display
Optical Display
Haptical Display
Heads In Display
Heads Down Display
Precision Screen
Precision Display
Immersive Display
Real Time Screen
Big Screen
Dense Screen
Tight Screen
Big Tights
Dense Tight
Density Display
Reticule Display
Lens Display
Lens Tight
Iris Display

Of all the above Iris Display makes the most sense, but there'll be licensing fees I'm sure. Unless they call it EyeRis Display heh.
post #30 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

I'm an old guy so I don't get to wrapped up in things that are hard to see anyways. I just don't like seeing the word impossible used in this context. Yes it is an engineering challenge but so was the trip to the moon.

...

In any event I prefer to look at this as possible even if maybe not probable. The idea that it is impossible just rubs me the wrong way.

Its this thing with propellerheads that they dont seem what is viable for a consumer device, even a prosumer device if you look at the price of apple gear.

In this case impossible to a consumer/bussiness owner = something that will cost too much and have a too narrow market. As for spacetravel that you brought up. How many folks would buy a vacation to the moon for a week for 20 billion dollars/person? Maybe a couple, but I wouldnt invest my money as an investor on a headless idea NOW. Its all about timing. You have to have a feeling when it is going to be. Would the iphone been a hit in the year 2000. Probably not because of its price, size, cpu power etc. Actually it is impossible if your scope means that the price is the same as the old model. Otherwise you would give money away or barely make even. That is something shareholders wouldnt approve apple did asmuch as you would like that.

If the iphone cost 5000 Dollars, It would probably have a lot of nice things on it that the model thats on sale now doesnt have. BUT who on earth could buy it besides millionaires???

That said the iphone NOR apple gear in any category doesnt include anything that cant be bought from of the self parts. Its just what you do with it (software) and how you put that gear together that maters....

WE ARE NOT GOING TO SEE 4X INCREASE IN RESOLUTION ON THE IPAD; END OF DISCUSION... Even 1080p is quite an expensive challenge that I dont think apple is able to master 2011 season, if they dont increase the price drasticly. Everything is possible but even 1080p is not very likely now with this pricerange. Maybe 2012 things have changed?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Limited supply reportedly keeps AMOLED from Apple's next-gen iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Limited supply reportedly keeps AMOLED from Apple's next-gen iPad