he said netbooks were crappy, not the ratio. Quit being a sarcastic dick all the time and engage in the conversation like a normal person. You've got the kernel of a good point in your posts, but its hidden by all your rhetoricizing and bravado. Stop it.
A theory: "HD" apps would be in true HD, which the iPad can not display ... yet
Hmmm?
You might want to re-read the post to which you refer... "Now you have a crappy 16:9 widescreen display" was Exactly what was posted.
I think a lot of you are misreading this article. I took it to mean that some developers were voluntarily adding "HD" or other suffixes to their app names ... not that Apple is attaching these labels in some deliberate or consistent way.
No I think everyone understood it correctly like you just said. The issue is the developers should know better. To be fair though you can't blame them cause it sounds good.
No-one's 'quibbling' over anything, we're merely discussing the subject, and HD is far more than just a label, it's an Industry Standard, and what doesn't matter to you is not the least bit reflective of the entire world's consumers..
Deal With It -
Quibbling: "argue or raise objections about a trivial matter". The word applies.
I dare anyone to tell the difference between 720p and 1080p on a screen that size. With a good encoding, I can hardly do it on my 50" plasma from 15 feet.
Of course it's the trolls that can't understand my reference is to the crappy widescreen displays on netbooks, which has nothing to do with fullsized PCs or HDTVs where there is more than enough display area to allow for a wider display. Sometimes I wonder if these are real people or bots designed to post the most inane things for out entertainment.
Quibbling: "argue or raise objections about a trivial matter". The word applies.
"Trivial" is the key word.
Suggestion: If the matter is so 'trivial' to you then simply refrain from joining the discussion, thereby allowing others to freely/respectfully express their opinions.
But any given trip to one's local electronics store will reveal that some 99% of all devices/monitors/laptops/netbooks/media players/et al. (including Apple's very own laptops etc.) are widescreen, and simply because Apple decided to go with 4:3 for their 'New Creation' will hardly reverse that trend.
Who ever said the trend should be reversed or that Apple wanted to reverse it???
Of course it's the trolls that can't understand my reference is to the crappy widescreen displays on netbooks, which has nothing to do with fullsized PCs or HDTVs where there is more than enough display area to allow for a wider display. Sometimes I wonder if these are real people or bots designed to post the most inane things for out entertainment.
Maybe, in the future, you should endeavor to compose your posts more carefully, so as to avoid such ambiguity.
After all, you clearly posted, "Now you have a crappy 16:9 widescreen display", which would lead any literate/intelligent individual to believe that you were referring to all 16:9 devices, including those sold by Apple.
Given the iPad's pixel density, 2 pages could rather easily be read side-by-side with the device held horizontally, and not much would be compromised using a widescreen resolution of 1280×720 while still affording a much more pleasurable video/widescreen viewing experience i.e. no thick black bars at the top/bottom.
I guess it is what it is at this point.
That would either mean a much longer device, or a much narrower one. Neither is palatable.
The fact is that 16:9 isn't a very useful size for most things. Why some people seem to think that watching video is the main thing to care about is something I don't understand.
It isn't best for the internet, or for Pages. Or for most games. Or for most anything for that matter.
What's the big deal bout not using all the pixels for video? I've nevr understood that.
Making it 1280 x 720 would be worse. Making it 1366 x 768 would cost a lot more. Where's the advantage to either?
This would certainly be the most ideal solution, because as it stands this 'fracturing' of the Apps Store appears to create a situation nearly as confusing as that which the Android Market has been so liberally lambasted (in here).
Apple has supplied the ability to do universal apps.
I will wait to pass judgement until I actually view one personally. If it is razor sharp - who cares? But I'm not holding my breath. 16:9 is the standard for film , videos and growing for still photography as video monitors all use that ratio and all these devices beit cameras, video camera, blu-ray players HDMI into them flawlessly. This could be an example where there 2nd gen iPad actually may change shape due to its lack of the universal standard.
So what? This isn't a movie viewer. It's a general purpose device. I'm not even happy that Apple went to 16:9 for the iMac.
No-one's 'quibbling' over anything, we're merely discussing the subject, and HD is far more than just a label, it's an Industry Standard, and what doesn't matter to you is not the least bit reflective of the entire world's consumers..
Deal With It -
It's not really a standard. It's just a convenience. You should go after the makers of HD Radio, since the HD means nothing there, but they are deliberately using it to confuse people into thinking it's high def radio. Actually, the quality is about the same as a 128 MP3, or worse.
And 1024 x 768 was used as a resolution for Plasma displays being called high def for years. They compressed the vertical res of the signal. So this can be called HD just as well.
So what? This isn't a movie viewer. It's a general purpose device. I'm not even happy that Apple went to 16:9 for the iMac.
It all comes down to personal preference, and your aversion to 16:9 appears to more exception than norm as it's impossible to deny that 'widescreen' displays are the industry norm at this point on virtually all devices, handheld and otherwise.
The fact is that 16:9 isn't a very useful size for most things. Why some people seem to think that watching video is the main thing to care about is something I don't understand.
It isn't best for the internet, or for Pages. Or for most games. Or for most anything for that matter.
Amen. I don't get the "widescreen" thing for computers used primarily for web browsing and document editing. For most users, this just means more empty space on either side of their content when they maximize their windows. At least that's what I see when I look around my local coffeeshop at everyone surfing Facebook or writing papers on their widescreen laptops.
It's not really a standard. It's just a convenience. You should go after the makers of HD Radio, since the HD means nothing there, but they are deliberately using it to confuse people into thinking it's high def radio. Actually, the quality is about the same as a 128 MP3, or worse.
And 1024 x 768 was used as a resolution for Plasma displays being called high def for years. They compressed the vertical res of the signal. So this can be called HD just as well.
Actually, HD Radio means Hybrid Digital Radio, as it is an analog/digital hybrid solution for over-the-air audio broadcast.
What's the big deal bout not using all the pixels for video? I've nevr understood that.
I feel a movie is more immersive without letter-boxing. The borders distract me while I watch the movie. This is especially true on a glossy display as it's pure black, which reflects most clearly.
I like the 16:10 aspect ratio as you can zoom up 16:9 movies and not lose much. 4:3 crops out too much and it's not like you can zoom in a notch, it's full crop or no crop.
The iPad display shows 17% less than 720p. In term of movie size, it's more like the SD resolution 576p as in anamorphic widescreen DVD 1024 x 576. If you display a 16:9 movie, you'll only fit 1024 x 576 on screen.
I think to avoid confusion, XL is a more appropriate identifier but people know what HD means so I don't think it matters.
Comments
he said netbooks were crappy, not the ratio. Quit being a sarcastic dick all the time and engage in the conversation like a normal person. You've got the kernel of a good point in your posts, but its hidden by all your rhetoricizing and bravado. Stop it.
A theory: "HD" apps would be in true HD, which the iPad can not display ... yet
Hmmm?
You might want to re-read the post to which you refer... "Now you have a crappy 16:9 widescreen display" was Exactly what was posted.
I think a lot of you are misreading this article. I took it to mean that some developers were voluntarily adding "HD" or other suffixes to their app names ... not that Apple is attaching these labels in some deliberate or consistent way.
No I think everyone understood it correctly like you just said. The issue is the developers should know better. To be fair though you can't blame them cause it sounds good.
Well the iPhone is primarily used in portrait and that's not 4:3.
True. Not that you actually made a point, however. The iPhone is what it is. This is the same ratio as an A4 sheet of paper, it's not a little phone.
No-one's 'quibbling' over anything, we're merely discussing the subject, and HD is far more than just a label, it's an Industry Standard, and what doesn't matter to you is not the least bit reflective of the entire world's consumers..
Deal With It -
Quibbling: "argue or raise objections about a trivial matter". The word applies.
"Trivial" is the key word.
Hmmm?
You might want to re-read the post to which you refer... "Now you have a crappy 16:9 widescreen display" was Exactly what was posted.
It makes more sense for laptops and the iMac to be 16:10, but the iPad makes more sense the way it is, can't you guys just be happy with it?
It makes more sense for laptops and the iMac to be 16:10, but the iPad makes more sense the way it is, can't you guys just be happy with it?
Question: What does your reply have to do with the issue to which my post referred?
Answer: Nothing, though I understand your whole don't worry 'be happy' position.
Not everything in life is about the specs.
Quibbling: "argue or raise objections about a trivial matter". The word applies.
"Trivial" is the key word.
Suggestion: If the matter is so 'trivial' to you then simply refrain from joining the discussion, thereby allowing others to freely/respectfully express their opinions.
Yes... In Your Opinion.
But any given trip to one's local electronics store will reveal that some 99% of all devices/monitors/laptops/netbooks/media players/et al. (including Apple's very own laptops etc.) are widescreen, and simply because Apple decided to go with 4:3 for their 'New Creation' will hardly reverse that trend.
Who ever said the trend should be reversed or that Apple wanted to reverse it???
Of course it's the trolls that can't understand my reference is to the crappy widescreen displays on netbooks, which has nothing to do with fullsized PCs or HDTVs where there is more than enough display area to allow for a wider display. Sometimes I wonder if these are real people or bots designed to post the most inane things for out entertainment.
Maybe, in the future, you should endeavor to compose your posts more carefully, so as to avoid such ambiguity.
After all, you clearly posted, "Now you have a crappy 16:9 widescreen display", which would lead any literate/intelligent individual to believe that you were referring to all 16:9 devices, including those sold by Apple.
I understand your position, but...
Given the iPad's pixel density, 2 pages could rather easily be read side-by-side with the device held horizontally, and not much would be compromised using a widescreen resolution of 1280×720 while still affording a much more pleasurable video/widescreen viewing experience i.e. no thick black bars at the top/bottom.
I guess it is what it is at this point.
That would either mean a much longer device, or a much narrower one. Neither is palatable.
The fact is that 16:9 isn't a very useful size for most things. Why some people seem to think that watching video is the main thing to care about is something I don't understand.
It isn't best for the internet, or for Pages. Or for most games. Or for most anything for that matter.
What's the big deal bout not using all the pixels for video? I've nevr understood that.
Making it 1280 x 720 would be worse. Making it 1366 x 768 would cost a lot more. Where's the advantage to either?
This would certainly be the most ideal solution, because as it stands this 'fracturing' of the Apps Store appears to create a situation nearly as confusing as that which the Android Market has been so liberally lambasted (in here).
Apple has supplied the ability to do universal apps.
I will wait to pass judgement until I actually view one personally. If it is razor sharp - who cares? But I'm not holding my breath. 16:9 is the standard for film , videos and growing for still photography as video monitors all use that ratio and all these devices beit cameras, video camera, blu-ray players HDMI into them flawlessly. This could be an example where there 2nd gen iPad actually may change shape due to its lack of the universal standard.
So what? This isn't a movie viewer. It's a general purpose device. I'm not even happy that Apple went to 16:9 for the iMac.
No-one's 'quibbling' over anything, we're merely discussing the subject, and HD is far more than just a label, it's an Industry Standard, and what doesn't matter to you is not the least bit reflective of the entire world's consumers..
Deal With It -
It's not really a standard. It's just a convenience. You should go after the makers of HD Radio, since the HD means nothing there, but they are deliberately using it to confuse people into thinking it's high def radio. Actually, the quality is about the same as a 128 MP3, or worse.
And 1024 x 768 was used as a resolution for Plasma displays being called high def for years. They compressed the vertical res of the signal. So this can be called HD just as well.
So what? This isn't a movie viewer. It's a general purpose device. I'm not even happy that Apple went to 16:9 for the iMac.
It all comes down to personal preference, and your aversion to 16:9 appears to more exception than norm as it's impossible to deny that 'widescreen' displays are the industry norm at this point on virtually all devices, handheld and otherwise.
The fact is that 16:9 isn't a very useful size for most things. Why some people seem to think that watching video is the main thing to care about is something I don't understand.
It isn't best for the internet, or for Pages. Or for most games. Or for most anything for that matter.
Amen. I don't get the "widescreen" thing for computers used primarily for web browsing and document editing. For most users, this just means more empty space on either side of their content when they maximize their windows. At least that's what I see when I look around my local coffeeshop at everyone surfing Facebook or writing papers on their widescreen laptops.
Well the iPhone is primarily used in portrait and that's not 4:3.
It's 3:2. In between.
It's not really a standard. It's just a convenience. You should go after the makers of HD Radio, since the HD means nothing there, but they are deliberately using it to confuse people into thinking it's high def radio. Actually, the quality is about the same as a 128 MP3, or worse.
And 1024 x 768 was used as a resolution for Plasma displays being called high def for years. They compressed the vertical res of the signal. So this can be called HD just as well.
Actually, HD Radio means Hybrid Digital Radio, as it is an analog/digital hybrid solution for over-the-air audio broadcast.
What's the big deal bout not using all the pixels for video? I've nevr understood that.
I feel a movie is more immersive without letter-boxing. The borders distract me while I watch the movie. This is especially true on a glossy display as it's pure black, which reflects most clearly.
I like the 16:10 aspect ratio as you can zoom up 16:9 movies and not lose much. 4:3 crops out too much and it's not like you can zoom in a notch, it's full crop or no crop.
The iPad display shows 17% less than 720p. In term of movie size, it's more like the SD resolution 576p as in anamorphic widescreen DVD 1024 x 576. If you display a 16:9 movie, you'll only fit 1024 x 576 on screen.
I think to avoid confusion, XL is a more appropriate identifier but people know what HD means so I don't think it matters.