or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › New pixel-level photos point to Retina Display iPad
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New pixel-level photos point to Retina Display iPad

post #1 of 38
Thread Starter 
Fresh photos purported to be of the much rumored next generation iPad's display have surfaced on Friday, and the microscope-enlarged images clearly show a QXGA screen that is twice the resolution of current versions of Apple's tablet.

While rumors of a Retina Display-sporting new iPad model have been increasing in intensity over the past months, leaked photos of screens, components, and even a partially constructed "iPad 3" have bombarded the web. The increasing amount of rumored "evidence" regarding a new iPad screen has been at the center of many discussions, though until now no substantial proof had been presented that clearly shows a change in display resolution.

The pictures released on Friday reveal a 9.7-inch screen that boasts a pixel density of 2048x1536, which could classify it as a Retina Display if it is indeed used by Apple in an upcoming version of the iPad. Current models of the iPad have a resolution of 1024x768 pixels, making the newly photographed display comparatively twice as dense.

These images, allegedly from a so-called "iPad 3" display that MacRumors obtained through unreported channels, were taken through a microscope in order to more accurately discern the exact number of pixels as compared to a current iPad 2. Previously leaked photos only showed a screen that was powered off, and thus pixel density could not be distinguished by the naked eye.

While the new photos are also of an unpowered display, ambient light was enough to clearly illustrate the increase in pixel density.




Apple is expected to unveil the next generation iPad in the coming weeks, with unofficial reports pegging March 7 as the rumored announcement date.

[ View article on AppleInsider ]
post #2 of 38
Good enough for me.
post #3 of 38
This may be enough to finally make me commit to iPad ownership.
post #4 of 38
Who are the jerks in these plants who are getting paid off for pictures like this? Clearly Foxconn has to accelerate their labor replacing robots implementation.

Edit: I see that MacRumors is probably in receipt of a stolen iPad 3 display. Apple should deploy the heavy legal artillery to recover any and all samples or property that is clearly theirs.

Quote:
MacRumors has now been able to obtain one of these iPad 3 displays and examine it under a microscope in an effort to determine whether it is indeed an ultra-high resolution Retina display. Physically, the purported iPad 3 display is the same size as the current iPad 1 and iPad 2 display at 9.7" in diagonal, and looks quite similar to the naked eye.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #5 of 38
I hope Apple have worked some magic and kept this either the same weight or even lighter.
Android: pitting every phone company in the world against one, getting a higher number, and considering it a major achievement.
Reply
Android: pitting every phone company in the world against one, getting a higher number, and considering it a major achievement.
Reply
post #6 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Who are the jerks in these plants who are getting paid off for pictures like this? Clearly Foxconn has to accelerate their labor replacing robots implementation.

And then the hacking would begin...
Android: pitting every phone company in the world against one, getting a higher number, and considering it a major achievement.
Reply
Android: pitting every phone company in the world against one, getting a higher number, and considering it a major achievement.
Reply
post #7 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Who are the jerks in these plants who are getting paid off for pictures like this? Clearly Foxconn has to accelerate their labor replacing robots implementation.

Edit: I see that MacRumors is probably in receipt of a stolen iPad 3 display. Apple should deploy the heavy legal artillery to recover any and all samples or property that is clearly theirs.

Apparently they bought it legitimately. The panels are available for purchase. This is PROBABLY the iPad 3 display, but not 100% confirmation.
post #8 of 38
The iPad 1 and 2 display is already pretty good. It's better than the displays in most people's monitors, as it is IPS. But this iPad 3 display is just going to be sick! I'm quite happy with my iPad 2 display, but I'll be getting the iPad 3 also, as it is simply too tempting for anybody to resist.

I can also imagine that it will be too much for any scalpers and other douchebags to resist, and the demand will be ridiculous.

Samsung had better get ready and make another one of their pathetic and ineffective commercials, because there are going to be alot of long lines soon outside of Apple stores and other places like Best Buy etc.
post #9 of 38
It's quite impressive manufacturing technology, to make such a dense screen without dead pixels. It was only a few years ago that dead pixels were commonplace but nowadays it's rare to find one on your new computer.

Also, I guess if they can do 9.7" they can probable do 11" and 13" which is why the retina support in OS X.
post #10 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Who are the jerks in these plants who are getting paid off for pictures like this? Clearly Foxconn has to accelerate their labor replacing robots implementation.

Edit: I see that MacRumors is probably in receipt of a stolen iPad 3 display. Apple should deploy the heavy legal artillery to recover any and all samples or property that is clearly theirs.

I don' think Apple has any recourse since it's not an Apple product; it's a component that Apple uses in their product. Now the component maker could take issue with it if it was indeed obtained illegally but unlike the prototype iPhone that Gizmodo bought these displays are clearly for sale in some regard at this point.

Now that doesn't mean Apple won't request MR to remove the photos and/or prevent them from getting any early press info.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #11 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Now that doesn't mean Apple won't request MR to remove the photos and/or prevent them from getting any early press info.

Apple. Give one of our brothers early press info.

That's a good one.

And I believe that as of two or three years ago, Apple got off their 'take down the images' kick because that instantaneously validated what was up as being real.
post #12 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

And I believe that as of two or three years ago, Apple got off their 'take down the images' kick because that instantaneously validated what was up as being real.

Pretty much. By the time Apple found out it was cached all over the internet and just caused the blogosphere to create more chatter about it thus increasing it's awareness while validating it. Not their most brilliant move.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #13 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post

Apparently they bought it legitimately. The panels are available for purchase. This is PROBABLY the iPad 3 display, but not 100% confirmation.

How could they possibly buy it legitimately, especially because there are no other products in existence that it would work with? This being a product made for Apple (if it is indeed real), they own it!

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #14 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I don' think Apple has any recourse since it's not an Apple product; it's a component that Apple uses in their product. Now the component maker could take issue with it if it was indeed obtained illegally but unlike the prototype iPhone that Gizmodo bought these displays are clearly for sale in some regard at this point.

Now that doesn't mean Apple won't request MR to remove the photos and/or prevent them from getting any early press info.

Can anyone tell me where, and from whom, I can buy this exact display today? I don't believe this component is available to anyone else currently. Color me doubtful.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #15 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Can anyone tell me where, and from whom, I can buy this exact display today? I don't believe this component is available to anyone else currently. Color me doubtful.

Right here.

$122.99

http://www.truesupplier.com/oem-appl...-pr-29884.html

post #16 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Right here.

$122.99

http://www.truesupplier.com/oem-appl...-pr-29884.html


Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #17 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post


Now, see how cheap they are? All these rumors that the display would drive up the price were unfounded!
post #18 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post

Right here.

$122.99

http://www.truesupplier.com/oem-appl...-pr-29884.html


But the price drops to $120.26\twhen you buy 10, to $116.89 when you buy 20, and $114.68 when you buy 50. Based on the progression they will be free once Apple buys more than 1700.

In all seriousness, iSuppli listed the iPad 2 display as costing Apple $127. ignoring all the stated prices I find it hard to accept that Apple will get a Retina Display for the iPad at a lower price.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #19 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Now, see how cheap they are? All these rumors that the display would drive up the price were unfounded!

2048x1536 IPS on a 9.7" flat touchscreen. I honestly did not see this coming. Even the PADDs in Star Trek (DS9 only for me, thanks) did not seem so high-res. [BTW when is Paramount going to license that Star Trek interface for touchscreens? There's some good and fun IP there]
post #20 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

How could they possibly buy it legitimately, especially because there are no other products in existence that it would work with? This being a product made for Apple (if it is indeed real), they own it!

Standard component manufacturer modus operandi.

1. Get contract from famous company
2. Manufacture for said company
3. Sell same or lower-quality components on the side
4. ???
5. Profit!
post #21 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Napoleon_PhoneApart View Post

This may be enough to finally make me commit to iPad ownership.

I second this. While I have a Touchpad (and like it for the firesale price and webOS), an iPad with a high res screen could replace my Mac, laptop, netbook, and TP for extended purposes that don't fit with my iPhone.
post #22 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

But the price drops to $120.26\twhen you buy 10, to $116.89 when you buy 20, and $114.68 when you buy 50. Based on the progression they will be free once Apple buys more than 1700.

In all seriousness, iSuppli listed the iPad 2 display as costing Apple $127. ignoring all the stated prices I find it hard to accept that Apple will get a Retina Display for the iPad at a lower price.

Doesn't Apple sometimes pump billions into companies to help them build new factories?

Plus... Apple is gonna place an order for about 70 million of these screens for the year... and they pay billions in cash up-front.

Surely Apple can get that price down a lil bit.
post #23 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Good enough for me.

This could be a prototype. If the tech is not ready for cost effective mass production, it still might not arrive on the iPad 3.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #24 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

This could be a prototype. If the tech is not ready for cost effective mass production, it still might not arrive on the iPad 3.

I had my doubts as well, until I saw the 1920x1200 panels arrive at CES in a number of android tablets. They are not yet available for consumers, but they were also not one-offs for the CES.
post #25 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

It's quite impressive manufacturing technology, to make such a dense screen without dead pixels. It was only a few years ago that dead pixels were commonplace but nowadays it's rare to find one on your new computer.

Now that you mention it, I haven't experienced nearly as many dead pixels with recent technology as I used to. I agree, with the density of pixels, that is an impressive feat. Hopefully it won't start to come back in by doubling the resolutions.

Mac displays could use displays like these as long as they don't increase the cost significantly:

http://www.macrumors.com/2012/01/10/...a-macbook-pro/
post #26 of 38
"QXGA screen that is twice the resolution of current versions of Apple's tablet."

AI: I see this written over and over again.

2048x1536 (3.145.728) or roughly 3 Mega pixels is not double the resolution of 1024x768 (786.432) 0.8 Mega pixels.

It is 4 TIMES the resolution of the current iPad!

If it is double the pixels in both directions on a rectangular surface it has to be 4 times the resolution, how hard is it to understand?

Kim
post #27 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neeper View Post

If it is double the pixels in both directions on a rectangular surface it has to be 4 times the resolution, how hard is it to understand?

Because both are correct depending on how the sentence is written and the material is presented.
post #28 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Because both are correct depending on how the sentence is written and the material is presented.

No it is not
post #29 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neeper View Post

No it is not

Yes. It is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Think about it. Display resolution is the measure along two axes on a Cartesian coordinate system. That means if you double in each plane you are doubling the resolution. However, that is 4x the number of pixels.
post #30 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Yes. It is.

So, the iPhone 4S's 8 Mp camera is only double the resolution of the 1st gen iPhone's 2 Mp?
post #31 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neeper View Post

So, the iPhone 4S's 8 Mp camera is only double the resolution of the 1st gen iPhone's 2 Mp?

Slightly more than (3264 vs. 1600), sure. You'd express the increase in pixels via multiplication, however, just as you do for displays.

Super Hi-Vision has 16x the number of pixels as 1080p, but is 4x the resolution.
post #32 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Slightly more than (3264 vs. 1600), sure. You'd express the increase in pixels via multiplication, however, just as you do for displays.

Super Hi-Vision has 16x the number of pixels as 1080p, but is 4x the resolution.

In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
post #33 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neeper View Post

In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

No, this has nothing to do with people's vision capability. This is an argument of semantics. You're not wrong. I'm not wrong. It depends on how you state what you're stating.
post #34 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neeper View Post

So, the iPhone 4S's 8 Mp camera is only double the resolution of the 1st gen iPhone's 2 Mp?

Note that "Mp" refers to PIXELS not RESOLUTION which is a measure of two adjacent axes not of surface area.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #35 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neeper View Post

It is 4 TIMES the resolution of the current iPad!

If it is double the pixels in both directions on a rectangular surface it has to be 4 times the resolution, how hard is it to understand?

The number of pixels doesn't tell you the resolution but the resolution tells you the number of pixels. This is elementary school logic and you're completely wrong.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #36 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Who are the jerks in these plants who are getting paid off for pictures like this? Clearly Foxconn has to accelerate their labor replacing robots implementation.

Edit: I see that MacRumors is probably in receipt of a stolen iPad 3 display. Apple should deploy the heavy legal artillery to recover any and all samples or property that is clearly theirs.

Officially its secretive, but I was reading so many articles where authors explained how Apple is one of the best players out there to make hype about their product (giving "leaks" to some sites")

Just ask yourself how can anyone get iPad 2 & iPad 3 displays and then bring them under microscope LOL

So can't help but think that it is only because Apple wanted this information to be leaked out and that is why there is so much leaked information about the iPad-3.
post #37 of 38
Wow, we're pretty geeky here but I'm leaning towards Tallest Skil... "Double the resolution" is generally understood when referring to pixel heights and widths as we are doing here.

"4x the pixels", "4x the pixel density" (I know, that depend on the screen sizes being equal) would be used when talking about total "pixel-level improvement".

Also, Apple uses the @x2 terminology in it's app, so "double-resolution" refers to doubling height and doubling width, hence "x2" instead of "x4".

Semantics, but well, that's my take.

Suffice to say this is INSANE resolution in an INSANE form factor for an INSANE price.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Because both are correct depending on how the sentence is written and the material is presented.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Neeper View Post

"QXGA screen that is twice the resolution of current versions of Apple's tablet."

AI: I see this written over and over again.

2048x1536 (3.145.728) or roughly 3 Mega pixels is not double the resolution of 1024x768 (786.432) 0.8 Mega pixels.

It is 4 TIMES the resolution of the current iPad!

If it is double the pixels in both directions on a rectangular surface it has to be 4 times the resolution, how hard is it to understand?

Kim
post #38 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by augustya View Post

Officially its secretive, but I was reading so many articles where authors explained how Apple is one of the best players out there to make hype about their product (giving "leaks" to some sites")

Just ask yourself how can anyone get iPad 2 & iPad 3 displays and then bring them under microscope LOL

So can't help but think that it is only because Apple wanted this information to be leaked out and that is why there is so much leaked information about the iPad-3.

I suppose all of it adds to the drama and mysteriousness of Apple product releases... Heck, even one of my usually not very excitable relatives knew about the iPad 3 release getting nearer and was quite interested in it!

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › New pixel-level photos point to Retina Display iPad