Apple's iPhone 4 "Retina" display claims spark controversy

2456789

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 178
    Yawn, indeed! Is it a kick-ass display or not? All who have seen it seem to agree that it is.



    Next...
  • Reply 22 of 178
    maccherrymaccherry Posts: 924member
    When the iPhone 4 drops it will sell like oxcoton crack cookies.HTC can boast an 8 mega pix camera and a big screen. That is all. Apple has the support,the ecosystem etc. Apple has thier own OS. Therefore Apple can do anything with the iPhone without restrictions.iPhone is a seamless masterpiece.

    HTC can take a Hike.

    IT

    Wait until the 2nd generation ipad comes out.

    OMG!
  • Reply 23 of 178
    eauviveeauvive Posts: 237member
    The angular resolution of the eye is 1', that is to say 1 mm at 3 m (or 100 km on the Moon).

    A 300 dpi display means each pixel is 25.4/300 = 84.7 µm.

    So this corresponds to the angular resolution of the eye at 3 * 0.0847 = 0.254 m or 25.4 cm (10 ").
  • Reply 24 of 178
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    Actually, people who need that type of glasses will likely hold it even further away.



    Lol I was actually just trying to be funny there.. but yes I suppose you're right :P
  • Reply 25 of 178
    easy288easy288 Posts: 80member
    Apparently Apple is being truthful about the retina display. It's God's fault for giving us visually challenged people bad eyes. \
  • Reply 26 of 178
    rbonnerrbonner Posts: 635member
    No, my display is better, the "INSERT NAME HERE" display. There is almost always a study that says your wrong.
  • Reply 27 of 178
    jbleniojblenio Posts: 27member
    I sure don't. 18 inches from my face is about right. And...if what they say is true, that 18" is true retina display distance relative to the resolution, it's hitting the mark. Now...could I care less? Sure. Jobs, perhaps...was just embellishing a little.



    But again, who holds their phone 12" from their face. I don't think many do.
  • Reply 28 of 178
    eauviveeauvive Posts: 237member
    I would also add that the intensity threshold of the eye is about 10^-14 W, which is roughly equivalent to the light of a candle at 16 km (~ 9 miles).
  • Reply 29 of 178
    macosxpmacosxp Posts: 152member
    Well... it sorta is and sorta isn't false advertising.



    Digital photographers are known to print at at least 300 DPI for images intended to be hand-held and at least 150 DPI for images that will be seen at least at arms-length. The reason is, when you go beyond that resolution, you can't really tell a difference in clarity. One of Apple's design guys probably told them that, so they assumed it was common knowledge.



    But that is like saying that when you hit 30 FPS, you eye can''t notice a difference. Which although motion appears fluid, it's not necessarily true.



    So while, yes, I think that 300 DPI may not be the true limit of the human retina at 10 to 12 inches, I think you would have to have very good eyesight and look very carefully to see anything other than smooth images and text, unlike on the current display where I can make out pixels fairly easily.
  • Reply 30 of 178
    takeotakeo Posts: 445member
    Semantics. Marketing. Who cares.
  • Reply 31 of 178
    asianbobasianbob Posts: 797member
    All these phones just need to get released now so we can start getting tech blogs to do side-by-side comparisons of the screen.
  • Reply 32 of 178
    mac31mac31 Posts: 44member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rorybalmer View Post




    Also take a ruler and put the end between your eyes.. then hold your phone at the 12 inch mark.. ya does ANYONE actually use it this close to their face?? (apart from people who won't admit they need glasses)



    Yeah, actually that's exactly where I view my phone from and no, I don't need glasses. I'd rather not extend my arm fully and try to use my phone from 20" away. That's uncomfortable and weird. I placed my phone a comfortable distance away from my face and guess what? That was about 13".
  • Reply 33 of 178
    ilogicilogic Posts: 298member
    a waste...
  • Reply 34 of 178
    9secondko9secondko Posts: 929member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    In the wake of Monday's iPhone 4 introduction, Apple has been the target of sharp criticism from some industry watchers and rivals looking to dispute some of the claims it made regarding the handset's new Retina Display.



    Apple says new display sports four times as many pixels as that of the existing iPhone 3GS, with a resolution of 960x640, 326 pixels per inch, and backed by the same advanced IPS (In-Plane Switching) technology used in the iPad. During his keynote presentation at the company's annual developers conference, chief executive Steve Jobs asserted that the resolution of the new display was higher than "the limit of the human retina," which he noted as 300 ppi at 10- to 12-inches away.



    In response to this, display expert Dr. Raymond Soneira, president of DisplayMate Technologies, contributed to an article over at PC World rebutting the claim. AppleInsider has previously referenced Soneira's extensive display critiques of both the Nexus One and the iPhone 3GS. In his most recent analysis, Soneira claims that the actual distinguishable resolution of the human retina is 477 ppi at a distance of 12 inches. According to his calculations, the iPhone 4's display wouldn't be a true retina display unless it was designed to be held at a distance of at least 18 inches from the eye, much farther than standard use for a mobile handset.



    Soneira's comments were picked up by several major news outlets, including Reuters, Fox News and Wired, some of which expanded on those claims to accuse Apple of false advertising.



    As numerous blogs sites continued coverage of the matter, some of the facts became further distorted, causing an eventual backlash against the criticism of false marketing. Discover Magazine blogger Phil Plait (link 4), who previously worked on the Hubble Telescope, sided with Apple by noting that Soneira's math assumes perfect eyesight, whereas the average person would be unable to distinguish the iPhone's pixels at a distance of a foot.



    Jobs' WWDC keynote also drew criticism for the use of comparison graphics between the iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4 displays that some pundits have similarly deemed as misleading. Digital Society, a non-profit think tank, alleged that Jobs during the keynote falsely propped the iPhone 4's dispay with graphics that show an iPhone 4 resolution as high as 815 ppi, and up to 489 ppi on a separate Apple advertisement.







    Adding to the controversy was global electronics maker Samsung, who joined the conversation by touting its AMOLED technology, which will be used in its recently announced Galaxy S, as superior to the newly released Retina Display. A spokesperson for the electronics maker told The Korea Herald (link 6) that although the iPhone has a higher resolution, "visibility difference is only 3 to 5 percent," while consuming significantly more power than its own technology.







    The LCD-IPS display used in the iPhone 4 is manufactured by LG, one of Samsung's primary rivals. For its part, research firm iSuppli believes that the competition between Apple and Google is bound spill over into a battle between LCD-IPS displays and AMOLED displays. Vinita Jakhanwal, a principal analyst for the firm, similarly sided with Apple, saying that while the Nexus One "upped the ante" for handset displays with its AMOLED display, the iPhone 4 "has raised the bar even further" with its LCD-IPS Retina display.





    oh, OK....



    So other screen manufacturers now say that their products are BETTER, while still saying the iPhone screen is better by ONLY 3 to 5 PERCENT...





    oookayyy...



    So when is better not really better.



    These people sound stupider every day when they lose the battle.
  • Reply 35 of 178
    macinthe408macinthe408 Posts: 1,050member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nyctree View Post


    who the heck holds their phone just 12" from their eye. 18-20 more likey, so IT IS A RETINA DISPLAY



    I agree.



    It's also sad to see a doctor stake his supposedly scientific (unless he's a chiropractor) claim on the distance someone holds a phone away from their face when being used.



    "Well, if it's 12 inches, Jobs is lying. However, at 18 inches it can honestly be called a Retina Display. Apple needs to tell users to hold it 18 inches away from their face to match their marketing message. Any less than 18 inches and Jobs is a liar."



    As such, both this doctor and Jobs are right. And both wrong.



    And to paraphrase the OP, "Yawn, yawn."
  • Reply 36 of 178
    It's not about whether the display lives up to expectations, it's about whether it matches the claims. When Apple ventures into this quasi-scientific data realm, they're setting themselves up for trouble.



    This is precisely what scientists do, and frankly, calling it a kick-ass display would have clicked with me much more than all this nonsense about the retina.
  • Reply 37 of 178
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    In short, an arrogant snob thinks his expert eyes are better than Steve Jobs says they are. What a moron, clamoring for a bit of attention. He got his 15 minutes, and now looks like an idiot because his assertion is, of course, absolutely absurd.
  • Reply 38 of 178
    jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,951member
    Quote:

    They can say this now, but they won’t be able to say such things and be taken seriously after the iPhone 4 is released and people have seen it in person. Until they figure out a way to make AMOLED visible in daylight, they’re not even in the game.



    Frankly, I don't think Apple's old displays (at least my 3G and my laptops) are good in daylight either, the contrast gets so low that it's of limited use. Sunlight is just too powerful, and at least my 3G's screen isn't truly transflective like my old feature phone was.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jblenio View Post


    I sure don't. 18 inches from my face is about right. And...if what they say is true, that 18" is true retina display distance relative to the resolution, it's hitting the mark. Now...could I care less? Sure. Jobs, perhaps...was just embellishing a little.



    But again, who holds their phone 12" from their face. I don't think many do.



    I think it varies by the individual. It seems to me that the people I see use their phones at about 12". I've not observed anyone going as far as 18" though.



    But whether it really fills the claim, we really won't know without trying it, but it sure sounds like the screen is going to be very nice.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by nyctree View Post


    who the heck holds their phone just 12" from their eye. 18-20 more likey



    Pulling a tape measure out to double check, 18-20 seems pretty extreme. 18-20" is almost it at arm's length for a typical person.
  • Reply 39 of 178
    Well, seeing how I've had vitrectomies in both eyes and have had both retinas lasered to death, I figure that the new iPhone 4 will match my retina's resolution just fine.
  • Reply 40 of 178
    spotonspoton Posts: 645member
    It's what happens to the image after it leaves the retina that matters.



    For me, it goes straight to my groin, if it approves, then the brain gets to see it.
Sign In or Register to comment.