Why high resolution screens matter for Apple's iPad 2

1356710

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 198
    daharderdaharder Posts: 1,580member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MFago View Post


    Your first and second sentences appear contradictory.



    There are certainly UI differences between the two devices -- an iPad is not just a larger iPhone. Perhaps you have not used both devices extensively. Why would it be "drastically" different?! They are both touchscreen systems running the same version of iOS, but with the UI optimized for the different display sizes.



    I use both my iPad and my iPhone4 on a daily basis, and again... the APPS are what are optimized, the UI is essentially the same in both look/function, even down to the (rather wasteful) icon spacing utilized on the iPad.
  • Reply 42 of 198
    normmnormm Posts: 653member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    At the same time, photographers and anyone else who deals with detailed images, ranging from X-rays and MRI images to detailed PDF renderings and 3D architectural models, will benefit from the resolution boost because it will simply be there to use. Even users with basic needs for iWork productivity apps, browsing the web, and playing puzzle games will benefit from razor sharp rendering of text (that iOS is capable of doing automatically) and enhancements third party developers make to their custom graphic assets (which are easy to add to existing apps).



    The resolution independent design of iOS will also allow Apple to potentially sell both new iPad 2 models with a very high resolution as well as the existing iPad at a low price tier, without causing fragmentation issues for developers or users. The same apps can run seamlessly on both, supplying normal or double resolution graphic assets as needed to take full advantage of the new screens while still working normally on existing models.



    Excellent points! Why dramatically increase resolution? a) To stand out in the market. b) To provide a new high end of benefit to anyone but particularly useful to the pros, and c) Increase the value of the low-end device (basically last year's model, sold cheaper) by keeping the OS and marketplace robust. Resolution independence means the low end (including last year's models) get the same apps and images, just not quite as crisp.
  • Reply 43 of 198
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ronbo View Post


    Thanks for that link. Brilliant, I say





    I can take the battery out which is incredibly important to me....
  • Reply 44 of 198
    Quote:

    since Mac OS X Tiger there has been a hidden option to scale up window controls and menu bars to cope with increasingly higher screen resolutions.



    I wasn't aware of that either!??!?!?!
  • Reply 45 of 198
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    I use both my iPad and my iPhone4 on a daily basis, and again... the APPS are what are optimized, the UI is essentially the same in both look/function, even down to the (rather wasteful) icon spacing utilized on the iPad.



    You can live with your desktop looking like a dorm room full of crap, but I'll take the minimalist look any day of the week.
  • Reply 46 of 198
    daharderdaharder Posts: 1,580member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    You can live with your desktop looking like a dorm room full of crap, but I'll take the minimalist look any day of the week.



    Personally, I don't care what you can/cannot 'take'.



    Have A Nice Day.
  • Reply 47 of 198
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    The iPad's battery life is pretty outstanding, so even if they lose a few minutes, it shouldn't prove an issue for most users.



    That is if the battery life in iPad 2 lose only few minutes compared to the current model, but we're talking about major improvement in screen resolution. There's no other way for Apple to work around it than to add bigger battery, which then means putting more weight to the device itself. Not to mention we'll have to deal with longer time to recharge it..
  • Reply 48 of 198
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    ... the APPS are what are optimized, the UI is essentially the same in both look/function, even down to the (rather wasteful) icon spacing utilized on the iPad.



    Evidently we have a differing opinion on what constitutes "UI."



    Apps usually use UI elements provided by the OS. The fact that iBooks (and many other apps) use multi-column views is an example of a difference in the UI provided by the OS.



    Certainly much of the UI is similar, sometimes (e.g., the icon spacing etc) with unfortunate consequences. But why should the two be "drastically" different?
  • Reply 49 of 198
    daharderdaharder Posts: 1,580member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kilimanjaro View Post


    That is if the battery life in iPad 2 lose only few minutes compared to the current model, but we're talking about major improvement in screen resolution. There's no other way for Apple to work around it than to add bigger battery, which then means putting more weight to the device itself. Not to mention we'll have to deal with longer time to recharge it..



    At this point... I'll remain optimistic.
  • Reply 50 of 198
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    The programmer simply presents the controls that best suit the app.

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    it uses the same SDK, something that didn?t happen for a few months after the SDK for the iPad was released. Don?t we now have a single SDK for iOS and Mac OS apps? Sure, they both use CocoaTouch as that is the primary I/O, but that DOES NOT MAKE THEM THE SAME APPS.



    Not all the time, but there are a lot of universal apps out there. However every iPad app is a iOS app. Every single one, unless it is written in Chipmunk BASIC or something.

    Quote:

    They are uniquely designed for the different display sizes and dimensions because, as previously stated, that is also the primary I/O. It?s fucking silly argument to say that apps are the same because the development tools are the same.



    it is the SDK that is the same and that is what I'm focused on. There certainly are a number of iPad only apps that use parts of the framework exclusive to that platform but they are still iOS apps.

    Quote:

    Does that make all apps made with .NET the same? Does that make all PS3 games the same?



    I'm not sure where you are going with this last statement. However I will bite, all PS3 games use the same SDK right? Now that doesn't make them the same and infact there is a wide variety. So what happens if one game completely ignores part of the SDK another game uses - does that make it less of a PS3 game?
  • Reply 51 of 198
    daharderdaharder Posts: 1,580member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MFago View Post


    Evidently we have a differing opinion on what constitutes "UI."



    Apps usually use UI elements provided by the OS. The fact that iBooks (and many other apps) use multi-column views is an example of a difference in the UI provided by the OS.



    Certainly much of the UI is similar, sometimes (e.g., the icon spacing etc) with unfortunate consequences. But why should the two be "drastically" different?



    Because there's so much more that the iPad's additional screen real-estate could used for... Oh Well, there's always Honeycomb, which is designed from the ground up for tablet/slate use.
  • Reply 52 of 198
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    Because there's so much more that the iPad's additional screen real-estate could used for... Oh Well, there's always Honeycomb, which is designed from the ground up for tablet/slate use.



    So are you the troll sitting on right or on the left on this video?



    http://video.nytimes.com/video/2010/...-iphone-4.html
  • Reply 53 of 198
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    Because there's so much more that the iPad's additional screen real-estate could used for... Oh Well, there's always Honeycomb, which is designed from the ground up for tablet/slate use.



    You mean a better use of the "home screen" real estate? Yes, I agree. Just like the MacOS Finder, that paradigm should be revisited. WebOS has some neat ideas.



    I use linux exclusively at work, but am not at all sure about an Android tablet.
  • Reply 54 of 198
    archosarchos Posts: 152member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post


    Because there's so much more that the iPad's additional screen real-estate could used for... Oh Well, there's always Honeycomb, which is designed from the ground up for tablet/slate use.





    The problem with Honeycomb, as the article points out, is that it's only for tablets. It looks nothing like Android phones (which themselves don't look consistent). Without the little cartoon indicating to consumers that "Android" is involved, there would be no association for them that a Samsung Continuum runs some of the same apps as an HTC Droid Incredible (if they can navigate the Android Market long enough to find any).



    Honeycomb will expect developers to start from scratch on a platform with zero users and zero apps for users from day one, just like WP7 or Palm. When it launched iPad, Apple leveraged the existing iOS platform to at least provide apps you could use on it, meaning developers were pretty comfortable investing time into building custom apps. There's now lots of compelling iPad apps.



    There's no reason to think there will be lots of decent Honeycomb apps, and if there are, what resolution will they cover, the Xooms or the Galaxy Tab? Or will developers create an infinite array of tablet apps customized for each variation of Android tablet and netbook?



    Android phones are already a mess, and would not be flying at all were the lack of an iPhone in 2010 not creating a vacuum for Verizon. Without carrier subsidies, without apps, without any OS familiarity between Android phones, why are people going to buy Android tablets? Pity?
  • Reply 55 of 198
    jd_in_sbjd_in_sb Posts: 1,600member
    Another masterpiece article from DED!
  • Reply 56 of 198
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    In some cases they are the same app.



    Not all the time, but there are a lot of universal apps out there. However every iPad app is a iOS app. Every single one, unless it is written in Chipmunk BASIC or something.



    Your strawman is Universal apps? You got me it?s one app download so I guess we can ignore that the UI?s are tailored for the display size, resolution and aspect ratio.



    I expect this from DaHarder, but not from you. I seriously don?t know how you can look at apps designed for the iPad and say it?s just a giant iPhone. Does Apple using the sake development tools somehow cloud your vision into thinking that makes them the same UIs?
  • Reply 57 of 198
    daharderdaharder Posts: 1,580member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Archos View Post


    The problem with Honeycomb, as the article points out, is that it's only for tablets. It looks nothing like Android phones (which themselves don't look consistent). Without the little cartoon indicating to consumers that "Android" is involved, there would be no association for them that a Samsung Continuum runs some of the same apps as an HTC Droid Incredible (if they can navigate the Android Market long enough to find any).



    You're obviously unfamiliar with various Android devices, and how they actually function.



    The advantage is that those apps already 'scale' very easily to all manner of (higher) resolutions, so virtually all existing apps will run perfectly on the newer OS, without becoming an unsightly mess.



    Apps written specifically for the newer OS stand to benefit that much more from the larger displays/higher resolutions, just as those written specifically for the iPad do on iOS.
  • Reply 58 of 198
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Archos View Post


    The problem with Honeycomb, as the article points out, is that it's only for tablets. It looks nothing like Android phones (which themselves don't look consistent).



    So would say, if the tables were turned, that they must exactly the same because they?re both Android OS¡
  • Reply 59 of 198
    daharderdaharder Posts: 1,580member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    I expect this from DaHarder, but not from you.



    Always with the childish insults when you're losing an argument (which is often)... How Sad.



    Suggestion: Leave me out of your posts, unless specifically addressed otherwise.
  • Reply 60 of 198
    djsherlydjsherly Posts: 1,031member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    Resolution independence isn't about bit maps rather it is about elements drawn to the screen. By elements I mean the fonts, lines, circles and other things that render a user interface.



    The idea here is that if you draw a circle that is one inch in diameter it will be seen the same way no matter what the resolution of the screen. That is one inch in diameter in the same relative location on the screen. For the user this would be very noticeable when viewing fonts as a 14 point font will be the same size on both screens. What the user Willard on the higher resolution screen however is a much better looking font.



    If this screen comes to pass the results should be stunning.



    I appreciate your explanation but if there were true resolution independence then there would only be a need to supply one set of assets for a project. The ui could take the higher resolution image and scale it for the lower resolution display. Clearly that is not the case here
Sign In or Register to comment.