Maybe a smaller iPad but with a retina display that could do at least 720p if not 1080p. Quick calcs make it appear that a 7" diagonal would fit really well and give you potentially a much higher resolution device. Image size would be zoomable so you could have the rumored in between size. I don't think I would personally ever want one but I can see a use for them. Just a thought.
Personally I (guess I) can wait (if I have too) for the Retina display at ~10" diagonal for a couple yrs.
In two years' time there will probably be a 12" iPad that does 1080p. Close enough for Retina Displayness
Let's see. 12" diagonal at 16:9, 1920x1080 pixels... Somebody calculate the ppi? Sorry, too lazy here to do it
A Retina display for the iPad would be too expensive at this time. On a more fundamental level, it's doubtful that the display manufacturers could provide enough parts for Apple's iPad production quantities.
Apple's partners struggled to provide enough of the IPS displays (I believe they had already second sourced the display and qualed a third supplier after the initial launch), so much so that they delayed the international release.
My guess is that a Retina display on the iPad may be two, three, even four years away.
I think we may see it sooner than that on a 5- or 6-inch iPad. Based on all the talk before the iPad launch about whether it was going to have a 10-inch or a smaller display, I wouldn't be too surprised to see an iPad nano next year.
In two years' time there will probably be a 12" iPad that does 1080p. Close enough for Retina Displayness
Let's see. 12" diagonal at 16:9, 1920x1080 pixels... Somebody calculate the ppi? Sorry, too lazy here to do it
1080p @ 326ppi
5.9 x 3.3, ~6.7" diagonal
1080p @ 182ppi gets about 12" diagonal.
I think 1920 x 1280 would be a better resolution though. Setting it to 16:9 assumes that its primary use is for playing videos, it's not necessarily very good for displaying photos or reading. 3:2 seems to be a better general-purpose aspect ratio.
I think we may see it sooner than that on a 5- or 6-inch iPad. Based on all the talk before the iPad launch about whether it was going to have a 10-inch or a smaller display, I wouldn't be too surprised to see an iPad nano next year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
1080p @ 326ppi
5.9 x 3.3, ~6.7" diagonal
1080p @ 182ppi gets about 12" diagonal.
I think 1920 x 1280 would be a better resolution though. Setting it to 16:9 assumes that its primary use is for playing videos, it's not necessarily very good for displaying photos or reading. 3:2 seems to be a better general-purpose aspect ratio.
I have to think a 12" iPad simply isn't going to happen. That new size requires a new SDK and new apps. I think a 5" to 7" iPad is much more likely if and when they do introduce a new size.
Current iPad is 9.7"(d) at 1024 x 768 pixels, equaling 132 ppi. Doubling that (going to 4x as many pixels like the iPhone 4) is 2048 x 1536, equaling 264 ppi. That is still about 20 ppi too low to be the commonly referred to minimum "normal" 20/20 vision.
Since this scaling makes it easy for developers I'm not sure Apple will go with some wonky size change just so they can make it a Retina Display. If they want to get to 326 ppi (for whatever reason) the resulting resolution for a 9.7" 4:3 display would be 2527 x 1900. For a 12" 4:3 display it's 3126 x 2350 and to hit the minimum Retinal Display marketing they can probably get away with 286 ppi it's 2743 x 2062.
None of those resolution ranges seem remotely viable so I think the best we can hope for is 4x the current resolution (which would awesome) but still put it below being a Retina Display.
Comments
Probably correct, but I hope not.
Maybe a smaller iPad but with a retina display that could do at least 720p if not 1080p. Quick calcs make it appear that a 7" diagonal would fit really well and give you potentially a much higher resolution device. Image size would be zoomable so you could have the rumored in between size. I don't think I would personally ever want one but I can see a use for them. Just a thought.
Personally I (guess I) can wait (if I have too) for the Retina display at ~10" diagonal for a couple yrs.
In two years' time there will probably be a 12" iPad that does 1080p. Close enough for Retina Displayness
Let's see. 12" diagonal at 16:9, 1920x1080 pixels... Somebody calculate the ppi? Sorry, too lazy here to do it
A Retina display for the iPad would be too expensive at this time. On a more fundamental level, it's doubtful that the display manufacturers could provide enough parts for Apple's iPad production quantities.
Apple's partners struggled to provide enough of the IPS displays (I believe they had already second sourced the display and qualed a third supplier after the initial launch), so much so that they delayed the international release.
My guess is that a Retina display on the iPad may be two, three, even four years away.
I think we may see it sooner than that on a 5- or 6-inch iPad. Based on all the talk before the iPad launch about whether it was going to have a 10-inch or a smaller display, I wouldn't be too surprised to see an iPad nano next year.
In two years' time there will probably be a 12" iPad that does 1080p. Close enough for Retina Displayness
Let's see. 12" diagonal at 16:9, 1920x1080 pixels... Somebody calculate the ppi? Sorry, too lazy here to do it
1080p @ 326ppi
5.9 x 3.3, ~6.7" diagonal
1080p @ 182ppi gets about 12" diagonal.
I think 1920 x 1280 would be a better resolution though. Setting it to 16:9 assumes that its primary use is for playing videos, it's not necessarily very good for displaying photos or reading. 3:2 seems to be a better general-purpose aspect ratio.
I think we may see it sooner than that on a 5- or 6-inch iPad. Based on all the talk before the iPad launch about whether it was going to have a 10-inch or a smaller display, I wouldn't be too surprised to see an iPad nano next year.
1080p @ 326ppi
5.9 x 3.3, ~6.7" diagonal
1080p @ 182ppi gets about 12" diagonal.
I think 1920 x 1280 would be a better resolution though. Setting it to 16:9 assumes that its primary use is for playing videos, it's not necessarily very good for displaying photos or reading. 3:2 seems to be a better general-purpose aspect ratio.
I have to think a 12" iPad simply isn't going to happen. That new size requires a new SDK and new apps. I think a 5" to 7" iPad is much more likely if and when they do introduce a new size.
Current iPad is 9.7"(d) at 1024 x 768 pixels, equaling 132 ppi. Doubling that (going to 4x as many pixels like the iPhone 4) is 2048 x 1536, equaling 264 ppi. That is still about 20 ppi too low to be the commonly referred to minimum "normal" 20/20 vision.
Since this scaling makes it easy for developers I'm not sure Apple will go with some wonky size change just so they can make it a Retina Display. If they want to get to 326 ppi (for whatever reason) the resulting resolution for a 9.7" 4:3 display would be 2527 x 1900. For a 12" 4:3 display it's 3126 x 2350 and to hit the minimum Retinal Display marketing they can probably get away with 286 ppi it's 2743 x 2062.
None of those resolution ranges seem remotely viable so I think the best we can hope for is 4x the current resolution (which would awesome) but still put it below being a Retina Display.