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

1234568

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 178
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Stevie View Post


    I wonder what percentage of the world's population can hear 20-20,000 Hz? Do we nevertheless use that as the spec for a reason?



    Great example. You accept that 20-20,000 Hz is the normal spec for hearing - even though a few people can hear well past 20,000 Hz (I have a friend who was once able to hear to 24,000 Hz).



    Similarly, 20/20 is the normal spec for vision - even though a tiny percentage can see better than that.



    Why is it that you accept 'normal' for hearing, but insist on 'superhuman' for vision?



    Oh, right. It's another chance for you to spew your mindless Apple-bashing.
  • Reply 142 of 178
    os2babaos2baba Posts: 262member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anonymouse View Post


    I think Gruber's response to this pretty much says it all:



    They have made AMOLED screens work in daylight. It's called Super AMOLDED and is present in the Samsung Galaxy S.
  • Reply 143 of 178
    os2babaos2baba Posts: 262member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post


    Yet, the battery life on the iPhone 4 is vastly superior (or, so Jobs says). I'll bet it was a well-thought out trade-off on Apple's part: how much incremental battery life versus how much incremental screen quality.



    The battery life on the Samsung Galaxy S is even better than the iPhone 4, in standby, talk time and browsing.
  • Reply 144 of 178
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by os2baba View Post


    They have made AMOLED screens work in daylight. It's called Super AMOLDED and is present in the Samsung Galaxy S.



    Surely Super AMOLED work "better" in direct sunlight, but 'd like to see some evidence that it's actually works well in direct sunlight and/or that it works better than LCDs in direct sunlight.



    Case in point, I wouldn't classify the iPhone, iPhone 3G or iPhone 3GS as working well in direct sunlight, just that they are still usable in direct sunlight. I look forward to comparing my iPhone 4 to my iPhone 3GS in direct sunlight on the 24th.
  • Reply 145 of 178
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by os2baba View Post


    The battery life on the Samsung Galaxy S is even better than the iPhone 4, in standby, talk time and browsing.



    Better, eh? I think you need to qualify that statement with "in some areas" instead of implying that it's better across the board. Or course, if you're just out to market the device and not here to compare specs for what you think is a good device then by all means keep stating halfisms.
  • Reply 146 of 178
    enjournienjourni Posts: 254member
    Oh god... have these people ever heard of marketing? I can't believe people are attacking apple over something so stupid. It's a freaking good display, apple calls it retina display, whatever. Who cares if it's not as good as your eyes, doesn't take away from the fact that it kicks the crap out of every other display out there. Just because some nerd calculated some number or such bullshit people all in a tizzy. Get over it!
  • Reply 147 of 178
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Quadra 610 View Post


    Makes no difference what you call it or what marketing terms are thrown around, the new display is gorgeous. That's all that matters.



    And all this debate about the accuracy of the statement, even the criticisms, are GREAT publicity for Apple. People may doubt whether the display is a "retinal" display, but they will all be aware that it's the best display on the market.
  • Reply 148 of 178
    Apple going to sell millions of phones because people will upgrade and new customers will fall in love with overall look of the new iPhone and it will be successful.

    These discussions are great and informative (except for 95% Stevie's comments, which sound like Tekstud and iGenius), but really will not change the fact that the iPhone 4 display is one of the best, if not the best coming to market.
  • Reply 149 of 178
    sennensennen Posts: 1,472member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Stevie View Post


    Here's what the other guy said:



    "Steve Jobs claimed that the iPhone 4 has a resolution higher than the retina - that's not right:




    except by your own admission that's not what steve said at all.
  • Reply 150 of 178
    asciiascii Posts: 5,936member
    I really appreciate what Apple is doing with pixel densities. It not only makes the display more beautiful, but in a way it simplifies the device too, because it makes one more technology - pixels - disappear (literally).



    I own an iPhone and an iPad, and do use them, but out of necessity spend most of my time on a desktop computer, so I hope they do dense Mac screens too.
  • Reply 151 of 178
    steviestevie Posts: 956member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sennen View Post


    except by your own admission that's not what steve said at all.



    Admission? Huh?



    I quoted the original statement and the rebuttal. Take your pick.
  • Reply 152 of 178
    sennensennen Posts: 1,472member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Stevie View Post


    Admission? Huh?



    I quoted the original statement and the rebuttal. Take your pick.



    the quote in your post showed it wasn't at all what Jobs said, i'll take that as an admission that you know you are aware of the untruth you are pushing.



    as for the rebuttal, a rebuttal of what? you prove that jobs didn't say what the "expert" based his argument on. argument invalidated.
  • Reply 153 of 178
    rbrrbr Posts: 631member
    and Apple should very well have known that every claim would be checked and the BS flag waved enthusiastically when deviation from the truth was found. It is inexcusable for Apple to make such unsubstantiated claims. The question now is whether the continued use of the name "Retina Display" constitutes a continuing fraud...they may be forced to drop the name either for legal considerations or simply because they will continually be lambasted for using it. It would have been better to simply state that it is the highest resolution cell phone display currently available and it looks great. He could even have said that it is approaching the limits of the ability of the human eye to resolve and not run afoul of the truth police too badly. Now every time the name "Retina Display" is used



    We all know that Steve is not always entirely truthful (he did promise "all the internet" with the original iPhone and we know that you can not access "all the internet" without Flash. Whether you think Flash should be there or not, it is there and only the delusional deny its existence) and sometimes he needs an internal "turth cop". The problem is that he would fire a "truth cop" whenever his ruling was inconvenient. Come to think of it, Steve would find the mere existence of such a function more than inconvenient.



    Another consideration when making unsubstantiated, if not outright false, claims is that people will wonder just what else they are being misled about.



    Speaking of doubting the truthfulness of claims, AT&T's claim that 98% of iPhone users use less than 2 GB of data a month is suspect on its face. If so few people exceed 2 GB of data (which isn't much) then just how does that actually impact the network? Just when are you lying to us AT&T?
  • Reply 154 of 178
    groovetubegroovetube Posts: 557member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RBR View Post


    and Apple should very well have known that every claim would be checked and the BS flag waved enthusiastically when deviation from the truth was found. It is inexcusable for Apple to make such unsubstantiated claims. The question now is whether the continued use of the name "Retina Display" constitutes a continuing fraud...they may be forced to drop the name either for legal considerations or simply because they will continually be lambasted for using it. It would have been better to simply state that it is the highest resolution cell phone display currently available and it looks great. He could even have said that it is approaching the limits of the ability of the human eye to resolve and not run afoul of the truth police too badly. Now every time the name "Retina Display" is used



    We all know that Steve is not always entirely truthful (he did promise "all the internet" with the original iPhone and we know that you can not access "all the internet" without Flash. Whether you think Flash should be there or not, it is there and only the delusional deny its existence) and sometimes he needs an internal "turth cop". The problem is that he would fire a "truth cop" whenever his ruling was inconvenient. Come to think of it, Steve would find the mere existence of such a function more than inconvenient.



    Another consideration when making unsubstantiated, if not outright false, claims is that people will wonder just what else they are being misled about.



    Speaking of doubting the truthfulness of claims, AT&T's claim that 98% of iPhone users use less than 2 GB of data a month is suspect on its face. If so few people exceed 2 GB of data (which isn't much) then just how does that actually impact the network? Just when are you lying to us AT&T?



    sure they did. And it will have people talking about the iphone 4 even more. Sounds like smart marketing to me.

  • Reply 155 of 178
    deleted
  • Reply 156 of 178
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RBR View Post


    and Apple should very well have known that every claim would be checked and the BS flag waved enthusiastically when deviation from the truth was found. It is inexcusable for Apple to make such unsubstantiated claims. The question now is whether the continued use of the name "Retina Display" constitutes a continuing fraud...they may be forced to drop the name either for legal considerations or simply because they will continually be lambasted for using it. It would have been better to simply state that it is the highest resolution cell phone display currently available and it looks great. He could even have said that it is approaching the limits of the ability of the human eye to resolve and not run afoul of the truth police too badly. Now every time the name "Retina Display" is used



    We all know that Steve is not always entirely truthful (he did promise "all the internet" with the original iPhone and we know that you can not access "all the internet" without Flash. Whether you think Flash should be there or not, it is there and only the delusional deny its existence) and sometimes he needs an internal "turth cop". The problem is that he would fire a "truth cop" whenever his ruling was inconvenient. Come to think of it, Steve would find the mere existence of such a function more than inconvenient.



    Another consideration when making unsubstantiated, if not outright false, claims is that people will wonder just what else they are being misled about.



    Speaking of doubting the truthfulness of claims, AT&T's claim that 98% of iPhone users use less than 2 GB of data a month is suspect on its face. If so few people exceed 2 GB of data (which isn't much) then just how does that actually impact the network? Just when are you lying to us AT&T?



    The fact is that the statement was true. When Jobs talks about 'human vision', he's clearly talking about AVERAGE human vision. No doubt Superman could see the pixels on this phone - along with an insignificant percentage of mere mortals. But 20/20 vision is DEFINED as 'normal' human vision - and all the published reports agree that for someone with 20/20 vision holding the phone at 12-18", the pixels will be invisible.



    Truth is truth, right? So why are you spreading lies?
  • Reply 157 of 178
    steviestevie Posts: 956member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sennen View Post


    as for the rebuttal, a rebuttal of what? you prove that jobs didn't say what the "expert" based his argument on. argument invalidated.



    AI did a whole article on what the expert said in rebuttal.



    But you say that he misunderstood Steve and that his argument is not a rebuttal?
  • Reply 158 of 178
    steviestevie Posts: 956member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    The fact is that the statement was true. When Jobs talks about 'human vision', he's clearly talking about AVERAGE human vision.



    You know that is not true. If not, reread what he said.
  • Reply 159 of 178
    steviestevie Posts: 956member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    . But 20/20 vision is DEFINED as 'normal' human vision - and all the published reports agree that for someone with 20/20 vision holding the phone at 12-18", the pixels will be invisible.



    Truth is truth, right? So why are you spreading lies?



    The published report you are responding to says very different. And Steve claims that at 10 inches, the eye cannot resolve the detail present.



    Truth is truth.
  • Reply 160 of 178
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Groovetube View Post


    sure they did. And it will have people talking about the iphone 4 even more. Sounds like smart marketing to me.





    Quite brilliant. A term no one ever heard of is the new buzzword for cutting edge display technology and seems to have completely overshadowed OLED as the greatest display achievement since the color television.



    I have a feeling that this is just the tip of the iceberg if the independent (though potentially biased) reports from WWDC are any measure of what we can expect the average user with think come June 24th.



    I also find it interesting that IPS seems to be getting no play here when that in itself is a great accomplishment considering that notebooks and other portable devices have long sense not used them due to the increased power requirements. Now we have IPS and 4x the pixel count while maintaining the same video playback time as the 3GS. I wonder if IPS for MBPs are coming soon?





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Groovetube View Post


    deleted



    Last edited by Groovetube; Today at 09:14 AM.. Reason: reply to spam post no here anymore.



    Appreciated. It's funny how often you see people asking for the removal of spam whist quoting the spam.
Sign In or Register to comment.