AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Reports claim Apple's third-gen tablet to be named 'iPad HD'
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Reports claim Apple's third-gen tablet to be named 'iPad HD' - Page 4

post #121 of 143
3/6/12 at 4:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Not Unlike Myself View Post

http://ipadhd.com/

LOL

So no... this is not likely.

Without elaboration, this means nothing.
Reply
Reply
post #122 of 143
3/6/12 at 5:54am
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

But ask average Joe anywhere in the world and HD means 'better quality image'. It means what the H and the D stand for - high definition. To 99.9% of the population it has nothing to do with number of lines, nor even aspect ratio.

You just made that up. If I am wrong, cite your source.
Reply
Reply
post #123 of 143
3/6/12 at 5:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Show us the proof that you can't say a display has 1920x1080 resolution if it has more than that. Show us the proof that high definition has no baring on the definition being high, but is defined solely by a measure of the aspect ratio.

You are seriously confused.
Reply
Reply
post #124 of 143
3/6/12 at 6:38am
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

You are seriously confused.

Says the guy who is confusing high definition with widescreen.

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply
post #125 of 143
3/6/12 at 6:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

If, in fact, the next iPad has this, calling it an iPad 3 would be very, very confusing.

Only because Apple doesn't have a history of correctly naming their devices.

Quote:
There was a study not too long ago concluding that roughly 1/3 of iPhone 4 owners thought they had a 4G phone.

I vaguely remember that. Horribly skewed, wasn't it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Without elaboration, this means nothing.

Since Apple hasn't bought the website, as they often do
Tallest Skil & Relic
"…AI is a private forum…" "Well, in that case, it's naked time…"
Reply
Tallest Skil & Relic
"…AI is a private forum…" "Well, in that case, it's naked time…"
Reply
post #126 of 143
3/6/12 at 7:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

And AI still can't do math: the resolution quadrupled, not doubled, should the rumored claims be true.
How often will you guys regurgitate the same mathematical garbage?

Better question: how often will you continue to be wrong even after people try to educate you over and over?

Resolution is a linear measurement and is reported in pixels (dots, lines, etc) per inch. Pixel density is an area measurement and is reported in pixels (dots, lines, etc) per SQUARE inch.

If the rumors are true, iPad 3 will have twice the resolution and 4 times the pixel density of iPad 2.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #127 of 143
3/6/12 at 8:20am
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

You just made that up. If I am wrong, cite your source.

You've got to be kidding me. Yes, I made it up but it is hardly taken out of thin air. It is based upon my understanding of people, generally speaking and I have fairly good grasp on of how the 'average' person thinks. So I don't need a 'source'. I am just a really smart guy.

Most people are not that interested in the technical specs of anything and believe me, for most people 'HD' means 'great picture quality'. I think that 'wide screen' may be seen as an implicit part of the 'HD' moniker by quite a few people, but 16:9 is generally referred to as 'wide screen', not 'HD'. When talking about televisions, the term 'flat screen' implies both high def and wide screen to most people. Its just shorthand based upon experience, but most of all marketing.
Reply
Reply
post #128 of 143
3/6/12 at 8:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

Most people are not that interested in the technical specs of anything and believe me, for most people 'HD' means 'great picture quality'. I think that 'wide screen' may be seen as an implicit part of the 'HD' moniker by quite a few people, but 16:9 is generally referred to as 'wide screen', not 'HD'. When talking about televisions, the term 'flat screen' implies both high def and wide screen to most people. Its just shorthand based upon experience, but most of all marketing.

When HD was first a reality in 720p and later 1080p variants it was first done in TVs because that is where the market and costs made the most sense. And widescreen makes sense on a large screen just like at the movies. Somehow Teckstud Part Duex only learned to associate HD with aspect ratio and not the resolution so he'll never realize that HD stands for high definition or that it's an independent measure than the aspect ratio. It was also pointed out that there are video formats that are defined as HD that are shot in [a] 4:3 [resolution]. Here is a demo video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oIgBDZbHao

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply
post #129 of 143
3/6/12 at 8:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

When HD was first a reality in 720p and later 1080p variants it was first done in TVs because that is where the market and costs made the most sense. And widescreen makes sense on a large screen just like at the movies. Somehow Teckstud Part Duex only learned to associate HD with aspect ratio and not the resolution so he'll never realize that HD stands for high definition or that it's an independent measure than the aspect ratio. It was also pointed out that there are video formats that are defined as HD that are shot in 4:3. Here is a demo video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oIgBDZbHao

That shot is 16:9. A lot of widescreen cameras, especially earlier HDV ones, had 1440x1080 sensor resolutions, and HDV is a 1440x1080 recording format too. The pixels weren't square.

However, not being a TV or a dedicated camera, I don't think TV-specific formats directly apply to a tablet computer.
Reply
Reply
post #130 of 143
3/6/12 at 8:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

That shot is 16:9. A lot of widescreen cameras, especially earlier HDV ones, had 1440x1080 sensor resolutions, and it is a 1440x1080 recording format too. The pixels weren't square.

However, not being a TV or a dedicated camera, I don't think TV-specific formats directly apply to a tablet computer.

Sure, but the resolution is 1440x1080. He was saying that 1440x1080 can't be HD. Bottom line: 2048x1536 is high definition.

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply
post #131 of 143
3/6/12 at 9:03am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

When HD was first a reality in 720p and later 1080p variants it was first done in TVs because that is where the market and costs made the most sense. And widescreen makes sense on a large screen just like at the movies. Somehow Teckstud Part Duex only learned to associate HD with aspect ratio and not the resolution so he'll never realize that HD stands for high definition or that it's an independent measure than the aspect ratio. It was also pointed out that there are video formats that are defined as HD that are shot in 4:3. Here is a demo video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oIgBDZbHao

Quite.

How could I tell you that a portrait formatted image has high definition if the term is locked to a certain aspect ratio? I know what HD 'typically' refers to, but to name the Zune HD as it was, was not technically incorrect. It just implied a certain quality, or in that case, capability.

By the way - the linked video is great for showing different resolutions, but the are all 16:9
Reply
Reply
post #132 of 143
3/6/12 at 9:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

But ask average Joe anywhere in the world and HD means 'better quality image'. It means what the H and the D stand for - high definition. To 99.9% of the population it has nothing to do with number of lines, nor even aspect ratio.

It's even worse than that.

The proliferation of "HD" apps in the store tells us that "HD" actually means something closer to "super-duper," as most of the HD apps aren't really HD anything but rather just the "full" version of the free app. In that sense "HD" is just the opposite of "Lite."

In the 70's one put "super" in front of a title for the same effect. In the 90's it was putting "Extreme" (or XTreme), after the title. Today it's "HD."
Reply
Reply
post #133 of 143
3/6/12 at 9:20am
How a marketing executive counts up to ten...

1... 2... HD... XP... Millennium Pro... Snow Leopard... CS3... First Premier Elite... X (Pronounced 'ten')
Reply
Reply
post #134 of 143
3/6/12 at 9:35am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Sure, but the resolution is 1440x1080. He was saying that 1440x1080 can't be HD. Bottom line: 2048x1536 is high definition.

I thought that part of the discussion was about whether or not HD specifically requires widescreen.
Reply
Reply
post #135 of 143
3/6/12 at 9:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave2012 View Post

How a marketing executive counts up to ten...

1... 2... HD... XP... Millennium Pro... Snow Leopard... CS3... First Premier Elite... X (Pronounced 'ten')



Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

It's even worse than that.

The proliferation of "HD" apps in the store tells us that "HD" actually means something closer to "super-duper," as most of the HD apps aren't really HD anything but rather just the "full" version of the free app. In that sense "HD" is just the opposite of "Lite."

In the 70's one put "super" in front of a title for the same effect. In the 90's it was putting "Extreme" (or XTreme), after the title. Today it's "HD."

Which is why I think Apple should adopt a 90's car naming convention - the iPad HDxsi... how cool is that? Its better than HD - its xsi! Reminds me of the guitar player in Spinal Tap explaining how his amp is louder than other amps because its got 11 steps on the volume control instead of the more common 10 steps.
Reply
Reply
post #136 of 143
3/6/12 at 9:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

It's even worse than that.

The proliferation of "HD" apps in the store tells us that "HD" actually means something closer to "super-duper," as most of the HD apps aren't really HD anything but rather just the "full" version of the free app. In that sense "HD" is just the opposite of "Lite."

In the 70's one put "super" in front of a title for the same effect. In the 90's it was putting "Extreme" (or XTreme), after the title. Today it's "HD."

In regards to iOS apps Lite seems to mean free and HD means large, or more specifically designed for iPad.

Because some people foolishly associate high definition with widescreen I am thinking iPad HD is plausible to drive home just how much of an evolutionary jump this display is. I also think appending HD to the end of Apple TV wouldnt be shocking.

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply
post #137 of 143
3/6/12 at 9:49am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

In regards to iOS apps Lite seems to mean free and HD means large, or more specifically designed for iPad.

Because some people foolishly associate high definition with widescreen I am thinking iPad HD is plausible to drive home just how much of an evolutionary jump this display is. I also think appending HD to the end of Apple TV wouldnt be shocking.

Apple TV HDxsi 3 - (HD here stands for 'Homer Designed') pure awesomeness.
Reply
Reply
post #138 of 143
3/6/12 at 10:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I thought that part of the discussion was about whether or not HD specifically requires widescreen.

His argument is that a 4:3 resolution would bastardized the term and be dishonest. I pointed out a known HD resolution that is 4:3. The pixel dimensions are irrelevant at this point but backs up my argument since 1440x1080 would not be represented pixel for pixel on a 16:9 HD display. No matter how you slice it high definition is not a measure of the aspect ratio. Of course, we now have people who say 720p isn't or wasn't HD.

PS: If being well above 1920x1080 isn't HD then is having a wider than 16:9 aspect ratio not widescreen because it's not common on TVs?

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply
post #139 of 143
3/6/12 at 10:21am
And one name shall rule them all...

iPad El Mondo Grosso
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
"So at the end of the presentation, Steve came up to me and said: Is the iPhone worth criticizing? And I said: Make the screen five inches by eight inches, and you’ll rule the world."
– Alan Kay –
Reply
post #140 of 143
3/7/12 at 2:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Sure, but the resolution is 1440x1080. He was saying that 1440x1080 can't be HD. Bottom line: 2048x1536 is high definition.

But you also said:

Quote:
It was also pointed out that there are video formats that are defined as HD that are shot in 4:3.

ergo, it sounds more like you changed your story, because I pointed out that it wasn't actually shot in 4:3. The original image was 16:9, the output is 16:9, that the number of recorded pixels is in something else is not actually relevant when the recording format is anisotropic. That's like saying Cinemascope is 4:3 because that's how it lands on the film stock, irrespective of the original framing or how it is displayed.

I'm in agreement with your conclusion, but this part of your argument doesn't help support it, in my opinion.
Reply
Reply
post #141 of 143
3/7/12 at 2:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

His argument is that a 4:3 resolution would bastardized the term and be dishonest. I pointed out a known HD resolution that is 4:3. The pixel dimensions are irrelevant at this point but backs up my argument since 1440x1080 would not be represented pixel for pixel on a 16:9 HD display. No matter how you slice it high definition is not a measure of the aspect ratio. Of course, we now have people who say 720p isn't or wasn't HD.

PS: If being well above 1920x1080 isn't HD then is having a wider than 16:9 aspect ratio not widescreen because it's not common on TVs?

Exactly. And the term HD predates atsc broadcasts in 16:9.

As bothersome as it is to some people, there is no global definition task force that can dictate the meaning of words.

In my book, it isn't a bastardization to call the new iPad "HD". It can display all pixels from a 1080 source. If this wasn't a good enough definition, most blu-rays wouldn't be HD. After all, many movies are not 16:9.

Attempting to narrowly define HD as exactly 16:9 is a pointless and counterproductive neuroses.
Reply
Reply
post #142 of 143
3/7/12 at 5:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman View Post

Apple TV HDxsi 3 - (HD here stands for 'Homer Designed') pure awesomeness.

Can we add in Turbo..everyone loves a turbo
Reply
Reply
post #143 of 143
3/7/12 at 6:27am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

But you also said:

ergo, it sounds more like you changed your story, because I pointed out that it wasn't actually shot in 4:3. The original image was 16:9, the output is 16:9, that the number of recorded pixels is in something else is not actually relevant when the recording format is anisotropic. That's like saying Cinemascope is 4:3 because that's how it lands on the film stock, irrespective of the original framing or how it is displayed.

I'm in agreement with your conclusion, but this part of your argument doesn't help support it, in my opinion.

Point taken. I certainly should have qualified what I meant by 4:3 to refer to the resolution. Poorly worded on my part, for sure.

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply

"Goodbyeee…"

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Reports claim Apple's third-gen tablet to be named 'iPad HD'