This is one of the first modern studies showing the limits of visual acuity.
Vernier acuity, crowding, and cortical magnification.
Levi, Klein, and Altsebaomo, 1985.
Vision Research, Vol. 25, Issue 7, pp 963 - 977
It is considered a seminal paper in the field of vision research on visual acuity.
From my perspective the Apple argument is that the pixel structure cannot be seen using the normal 1 arc minute (0.9 or whatever) rule of thumb for visual acuity since it is over 60 pixels per degree. It doesn't make the grade for the 0.4 arc minute theoretical max based on the diameter of the foveal cone unless I did my math wrong (I got 60.23 pixels per degree at 10 inches).
Vernier acuity seems less relevant to me unless the expected use case of the phone display is discerning spatial differences between lines. Yes, yes, I can see power lines at great distances too...but I dunno that I care that it's not visible in my iPhone image of a picture. I'm of the suspicion that you can't capture that in most cameras anyway. I also don't know what any UI or image/movie playback implications might be.
Quote:
The fact is we are able to distinguish details down to 8 arcminutes at 16 feet. And just so you know, that is 40% of the size of a human cone photoreceptor.
This isn't my field so could you explain that a bit? 1 arc minute at 20 feet is about 1/16th of an inch if I remember right. What does 8 arc minutes at 16 feet mean?
I have to differ. You can discuss perception, and that's fine. But under what conditions are you relating this to? What contrast levels are you using for your statements? I don understand this, and I know very well that at about 12" 300 dpi, or ppi, the normal human eye can't distinguish individual lines or dots, unless the contrast is very high. It's generally accepted that 20/20 vision allows about a one minute width line to be observed in a high contrast line pair.
Are you saying differently?
He is. Power lines is the classic example that most folks are familiar with. The max observed human acuity is around 20/8 if I remember right and the average around 20/16. There are some sharp eyed folks out there.
Vernier acuity takes you down to around 8-10 arc seconds vs that 1 arc minute. This means a lot more in the real analog world I think than the digital one...the gigapixl camera can image to this level of detail but probably not much else...
In real life you can probably see all the power lines in that picture (all the way down that road). Even with a high end DLSR with good glass and huge 14MP sensor I bet you don't have that data in the raw imagery.
I do hope (and rather expect) the iOS 4 will run on my iPad. Will find out in a couple weeks. Given it is the same A4 chip, I expect it to run essentially all the features of iPhone 4. Purely a guess though. I do expect further word on the tethering issue though. Curious to see how that plays out.
I think there was some preliminary information from Apple indicating that iOS 4 would be available for the iPhone platform at the time of the iPhone 4 release, but the iPad would not see iOS 4 until this fall sometime. No clue as to why the delay on iPad, but I'm fine with waiting a couple months on that.
I think there was some preliminary information from Apple indicating that iOS 4 would be available for the iPhone platform at the time of the iPhone 4 release, but the iPad would not see iOS 4 until this fall sometime. No clue as to why the delay on iPad, but I'm fine with waiting a couple months on that.
Yes, they indicated that iOS 4 would be available for iPad in the Fall. So the version released on the 21st will not be for iPad. The delay is probably because, although based on common code, there are significant differences between what runs on each device.
Facetime? You mean Skype. Hi def screens? All over the place. Just because Apple gives them a name does not make them new or theirs. Locked down like a prison ? Check. Requiring iTunes just to wipe you *ss? Check. Even more proprietary and locked down with a micro SIM? Check. iBooks utterly useless on a 3.5" screen? Check. iAds annoying your head with every click? Check.
Real Multitasking (a la Palm Pre or Maemo?) instead of a glorified freeze state? Most definitely not check. Option of a qwerty keyboard? Most definitely not check. Able to make video calls when on a train/holiday/not in an urban area with wi-fi? Most definitely not check.
You should all say baaa and just start queuing now. Absolute sheep.
How good does that make you feel? You know so much and are sooo smart. We all now know that we are going to get ripped off when we sign up for an iPhone. It just feels good to get a reality check, see how stupid I am, and know how easy I am to dupe.
Meanwhile, you'll just have to be content chatting with one of the 100 million or so who will be buying this in the next 18 months or so (including iPod Touch buyers).
How do you initiate a cellphone call to someone's iPod Touch?
Hmm... You have an even better point here. Sell the 3GS for $300, and that's enough to buy a new iPhone 4 for me and find an 8GB iPod Touch on eBay for the little guy.
You really think people would pay $300 for a used 3GS?
It's unlocked! Imagine how much YOU would pay for one if you broke or lost your iphone while still on contract. The market for old iPhones is HOT!
Edit sorry bad choice of words. It's not unlocked of course, but it's no longer subsidized and can slide right in for another ATT subscriber who needs a phone.
How do you initiate a cellphone call to someone's iPod Touch?
That's the rub. If you are going to be doing a video over WiFi, do you need audio over the cellular network? There is no reason it has to initiate a cellular call first. If you both have a device with a camera using FaceTime's "open" standards then you should be good to go.
I'm still on page 2 so someone else may have answered this, but the 6 axis bit refers to up, down, left, right, forward, back I believe. Sixaxis was also the name of the PS3 controller.
Wow, that's late. My NEC had it in 2005, and I think that model originally came out in late '04. Though i daresay the experience on Nokias was equally as unsatisfactory - small screen, poor picture and stream quality, massive data costs.
Seems like it might actually be a usable feature on the iPhone.
3 Mobile (Hutchison Telecoms) actually launched video calling over 3G in 2003 in Australia.
Obviously it sucked etc etc, but wow, that's a looong time ago. And we're talking over 3G, not just via wifi...
I still think it's surprising. If people want to pay that much for a one year old used phone that's had someone else's grubby hands, facial oils, ear wax and spittle, more power to them. The surface is easy to clean, the recesses and seams might be a little hard to sanitize, even if Apple has the most seamless device out there, they are still there. The cost of a replacement unit is a concern though, I guess that should mean that I should keep my battle fatigued 3G around to tide me over should something happen to my 4.
I still think it's surprising. If people want to pay that much for a one year old used phone that's had someone else's grubby hands, facial oils, ear wax and spittle, more power to them. The surface is easy to clean, the recesses and seams might be a little hard to sanitize, even if Apple has the most seamless device out there, they are still there. The cost of a replacement unit is a concern though, I guess that should mean that I should keep my battle fatigued 3G around to tide me over should something happen to my 4.
I just figured they were "chop shopping" them for parts.
I was strongly considering getting an iPad to replace an old laptop that I only really use on trips for internet access. But now that iPhone 4 is out, I'm debating holding off. Looking at the Retina Display and the front facing cam with FaceTime, I am thinking I'd rather wait for next year's iPad with all that stuff.
I was strongly considering getting an iPad to replace an old laptop that I only really use on trips for internet access. But now that iPhone 4 is out, I'm debating holding off. Looking at the Retina Display and the front facing cam with FaceTime, I am thinking I'd rather wait for next year's iPad with all that stuff.
Is there a way to use the Dock Connector to output to a monitor? The iPhone 4 can already use a bluetooth keyboard. If someone finds a way to connect it to a small screen and it becomes a real laptop replacement.
I was strongly considering getting an iPad to replace an old laptop that I only really use on trips for internet access. But now that iPhone 4 is out, I'm debating holding off. Looking at the Retina Display and the front facing cam with FaceTime, I am thinking I'd rather wait for next year's iPad with all that stuff.
I'd like those features too... but, ttthink about it for a minute:
1) A large Retinal Display would be very expensive and require lots of RAM just to hold display pixels
2) An iPad with a front-facing cam would be OK if you had a vertical stand or KB dock, but little use otherwise (a rear-facing cam would be clumsy to use on the tablet form factor)
3) The $29 CCK (Camera Connection Kit) allows you to directly connect the iPhone and the iPad (when needed) to give sight to the iPad and storage and processing power to the iPhone.
4) You can tradeoff $ and convenience for time and interconnect the 2 devices via WiFi
Apple is very exacting about what features and capacities it puts into a device-- and even more exacting about what it leaves out. A large Retinal Display and a camera just wouldn't deliver enough utility (bang for the buck) on the iPad.
Heh. Well, the beauty of the iPod concept, to me, is that I don't have to plan in advance what I want to listen to. I used to select a dozen CDs to take with me. Now I just take the iPod, and everything is there. If I see a sign beside the road that reminds me of a song I used to like, I dial it up and listen. Even if I'm just working in the back yard, and a Beatles song pops into my head and I want to hear the album it came from, I don't want to go inside, fiddle with my playlists, and re-sync before I can listen. It might sound trivial to some people, but to me that's the whole point of the device.
As for accessing my music library or any other data from a cloud service -- no thanks! I like storing my own files on my own computers.
At this point I'm leaning toward getting the smaller iPhone -- that will replace my current phone, camera and GPS -- but keeping the iPod for music. Hopefully it won't be too annoying to keep two devices updated, synced and charged, because I'll essentially be locked into that setup for two years due to the subsidized iPhone pricing.
Hmm... You could view the iPhone as a compromise. You cut your 5000 sings down to about 1000, or about 100 CDs rather than the dozen you used to take with you, and now you have everything portable on a single device with maybe not being able to immediately satisfy every single whim. When the space to carry an extra device isn't an issue or your feeling seriously eclectic, you just grab the big iPod.
I keep two devices sync'd now, my iPhone and the wife's iPad. I've never had any issues doing this. Each device has it's own profile in iTunes to pick and choose what you want to sync. For instance, I sync some videos to the iPad but no videos to my iPhone. The biggest headache in your case will be creating the playlists for the iPhone that will have your trimmed down music selection.
Comments
This is one of the first modern studies showing the limits of visual acuity.
Vernier acuity, crowding, and cortical magnification.
Levi, Klein, and Altsebaomo, 1985.
Vision Research, Vol. 25, Issue 7, pp 963 - 977
It is considered a seminal paper in the field of vision research on visual acuity.
From my perspective the Apple argument is that the pixel structure cannot be seen using the normal 1 arc minute (0.9 or whatever) rule of thumb for visual acuity since it is over 60 pixels per degree. It doesn't make the grade for the 0.4 arc minute theoretical max based on the diameter of the foveal cone unless I did my math wrong (I got 60.23 pixels per degree at 10 inches).
Vernier acuity seems less relevant to me unless the expected use case of the phone display is discerning spatial differences between lines. Yes, yes, I can see power lines at great distances too...but I dunno that I care that it's not visible in my iPhone image of a picture. I'm of the suspicion that you can't capture that in most cameras anyway. I also don't know what any UI or image/movie playback implications might be.
The fact is we are able to distinguish details down to 8 arcminutes at 16 feet. And just so you know, that is 40% of the size of a human cone photoreceptor.
This isn't my field so could you explain that a bit? 1 arc minute at 20 feet is about 1/16th of an inch if I remember right. What does 8 arc minutes at 16 feet mean?
I have to differ. You can discuss perception, and that's fine. But under what conditions are you relating this to? What contrast levels are you using for your statements? I don understand this, and I know very well that at about 12" 300 dpi, or ppi, the normal human eye can't distinguish individual lines or dots, unless the contrast is very high. It's generally accepted that 20/20 vision allows about a one minute width line to be observed in a high contrast line pair.
Are you saying differently?
He is. Power lines is the classic example that most folks are familiar with. The max observed human acuity is around 20/8 if I remember right and the average around 20/16. There are some sharp eyed folks out there.
Vernier acuity takes you down to around 8-10 arc seconds vs that 1 arc minute. This means a lot more in the real analog world I think than the digital one...the gigapixl camera can image to this level of detail but probably not much else...
Example from the Apple site:
http://images.apple.com/iphone/featu...5-20100607.jpg
In real life you can probably see all the power lines in that picture (all the way down that road). Even with a high end DLSR with good glass and huge 14MP sensor I bet you don't have that data in the raw imagery.
I do hope (and rather expect) the iOS 4 will run on my iPad. Will find out in a couple weeks. Given it is the same A4 chip, I expect it to run essentially all the features of iPhone 4. Purely a guess though. I do expect further word on the tethering issue though. Curious to see how that plays out.
I think there was some preliminary information from Apple indicating that iOS 4 would be available for the iPhone platform at the time of the iPhone 4 release, but the iPad would not see iOS 4 until this fall sometime. No clue as to why the delay on iPad, but I'm fine with waiting a couple months on that.
I think there was some preliminary information from Apple indicating that iOS 4 would be available for the iPhone platform at the time of the iPhone 4 release, but the iPad would not see iOS 4 until this fall sometime. No clue as to why the delay on iPad, but I'm fine with waiting a couple months on that.
Yes, they indicated that iOS 4 would be available for iPad in the Fall. So the version released on the 21st will not be for iPad. The delay is probably because, although based on common code, there are significant differences between what runs on each device.
Which would be about a 4,927,000 MP screen.
How much would you be willing to pay for such a screen, even if it exists?
I would pay a lot for a 4.9 million MegaPixel screen.
Facetime? You mean Skype. Hi def screens? All over the place. Just because Apple gives them a name does not make them new or theirs. Locked down like a prison ? Check. Requiring iTunes just to wipe you *ss? Check. Even more proprietary and locked down with a micro SIM? Check. iBooks utterly useless on a 3.5" screen? Check. iAds annoying your head with every click? Check.
Real Multitasking (a la Palm Pre or Maemo?) instead of a glorified freeze state? Most definitely not check. Option of a qwerty keyboard? Most definitely not check. Able to make video calls when on a train/holiday/not in an urban area with wi-fi? Most definitely not check.
You should all say baaa and just start queuing now. Absolute sheep.
How good does that make you feel? You know so much and are sooo smart. We all now know that we are going to get ripped off when we sign up for an iPhone. It just feels good to get a reality check, see how stupid I am, and know how easy I am to dupe.
Have a nice day!
Meanwhile, you'll just have to be content chatting with one of the 100 million or so who will be buying this in the next 18 months or so (including iPod Touch buyers).
How do you initiate a cellphone call to someone's iPod Touch?
Hmm... You have an even better point here. Sell the 3GS for $300, and that's enough to buy a new iPhone 4 for me and find an 8GB iPod Touch on eBay for the little guy.
You really think people would pay $300 for a used 3GS?
It's unlocked! Imagine how much YOU would pay for one if you broke or lost your iphone while still on contract. The market for old iPhones is HOT!
Edit sorry bad choice of words. It's not unlocked of course, but it's no longer subsidized and can slide right in for another ATT subscriber who needs a phone.
How do you initiate a cellphone call to someone's iPod Touch?
That's the rub. If you are going to be doing a video over WiFi, do you need audio over the cellular network? There is no reason it has to initiate a cellular call first. If you both have a device with a camera using FaceTime's "open" standards then you should be good to go.
You really think people would pay $300 for a used 3GS?
Nope! But how about $296?
I'm still on page 2 so someone else may have answered this, but the 6 axis bit refers to up, down, left, right, forward, back I believe. Sixaxis was also the name of the PS3 controller.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_degrees_of_freedom
3 axis (accelerations) + 3 rotations about those axis
Wow, that's late. My NEC had it in 2005, and I think that model originally came out in late '04. Though i daresay the experience on Nokias was equally as unsatisfactory - small screen, poor picture and stream quality, massive data costs.
Seems like it might actually be a usable feature on the iPhone.
3 Mobile (Hutchison Telecoms) actually launched video calling over 3G in 2003 in Australia.
Obviously it sucked etc etc, but wow, that's a looong time ago. And we're talking over 3G, not just via wifi...
Nope! But how about $296?
I still think it's surprising. If people want to pay that much for a one year old used phone that's had someone else's grubby hands, facial oils, ear wax and spittle, more power to them. The surface is easy to clean, the recesses and seams might be a little hard to sanitize, even if Apple has the most seamless device out there, they are still there. The cost of a replacement unit is a concern though, I guess that should mean that I should keep my battle fatigued 3G around to tide me over should something happen to my 4.
I still think it's surprising. If people want to pay that much for a one year old used phone that's had someone else's grubby hands, facial oils, ear wax and spittle, more power to them. The surface is easy to clean, the recesses and seams might be a little hard to sanitize, even if Apple has the most seamless device out there, they are still there. The cost of a replacement unit is a concern though, I guess that should mean that I should keep my battle fatigued 3G around to tide me over should something happen to my 4.
I just figured they were "chop shopping" them for parts.
I just figured they were "chop shopping" them for parts.
That makes sense, it would be an easier way to make money.
I was strongly considering getting an iPad to replace an old laptop that I only really use on trips for internet access. But now that iPhone 4 is out, I'm debating holding off. Looking at the Retina Display and the front facing cam with FaceTime, I am thinking I'd rather wait for next year's iPad with all that stuff.
Is there a way to use the Dock Connector to output to a monitor? The iPhone 4 can already use a bluetooth keyboard. If someone finds a way to connect it to a small screen and it becomes a real laptop replacement.
Dual mics are for noise cancellation. Just like on the Nexus One. So why would they add another speaker?
You didn't read my quote from the Apple web site which mentioned the two mics and the word "speakers"... plural.
It has since been changed though, so there is only one speaker as there always has been.
I was strongly considering getting an iPad to replace an old laptop that I only really use on trips for internet access. But now that iPhone 4 is out, I'm debating holding off. Looking at the Retina Display and the front facing cam with FaceTime, I am thinking I'd rather wait for next year's iPad with all that stuff.
I'd like those features too... but, ttthink about it for a minute:
1) A large Retinal Display would be very expensive and require lots of RAM just to hold display pixels
2) An iPad with a front-facing cam would be OK if you had a vertical stand or KB dock, but little use otherwise (a rear-facing cam would be clumsy to use on the tablet form factor)
3) The $29 CCK (Camera Connection Kit) allows you to directly connect the iPhone and the iPad (when needed) to give sight to the iPad and storage and processing power to the iPhone.
4) You can tradeoff $ and convenience for time and interconnect the 2 devices via WiFi
Apple is very exacting about what features and capacities it puts into a device-- and even more exacting about what it leaves out. A large Retinal Display and a camera just wouldn't deliver enough utility (bang for the buck) on the iPad.
.
Heh. Well, the beauty of the iPod concept, to me, is that I don't have to plan in advance what I want to listen to. I used to select a dozen CDs to take with me. Now I just take the iPod, and everything is there. If I see a sign beside the road that reminds me of a song I used to like, I dial it up and listen. Even if I'm just working in the back yard, and a Beatles song pops into my head and I want to hear the album it came from, I don't want to go inside, fiddle with my playlists, and re-sync before I can listen. It might sound trivial to some people, but to me that's the whole point of the device.
As for accessing my music library or any other data from a cloud service -- no thanks! I like storing my own files on my own computers.
At this point I'm leaning toward getting the smaller iPhone -- that will replace my current phone, camera and GPS -- but keeping the iPod for music. Hopefully it won't be too annoying to keep two devices updated, synced and charged, because I'll essentially be locked into that setup for two years due to the subsidized iPhone pricing.
Hmm... You could view the iPhone as a compromise. You cut your 5000 sings down to about 1000, or about 100 CDs rather than the dozen you used to take with you, and now you have everything portable on a single device with maybe not being able to immediately satisfy every single whim. When the space to carry an extra device isn't an issue or your feeling seriously eclectic, you just grab the big iPod.
I keep two devices sync'd now, my iPhone and the wife's iPad. I've never had any issues doing this. Each device has it's own profile in iTunes to pick and choose what you want to sync. For instance, I sync some videos to the iPad but no videos to my iPhone. The biggest headache in your case will be creating the playlists for the iPhone that will have your trimmed down music selection.