Unverified photo may show pre-production iPad 3 Retina Display

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 50
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MobiusStrip View Post


    This would be typical of Apple. Introduce a pointlessly higher-resolution screen (wasting memory and processing resources) instead of addressing the two problems that plague the current screens:



    Glossy (as you call them) screens have been the single biggest advancement to LCD technology in history. Beyond that a touch screen isn't going to hold up to well if made of soft materials matte screens are made of.

    Quote:

    1. GLOSS. Apple continues to embarrass itself with ignorant glossy screens. Since when does a "leader" take cues from the third-tier plastic schlock being peddled at Best Buy? If you're Apple, since about five years ago. Meanwhile, E-readers clearly demonstrate the superiority of matte screens. Glossy screens are the biggest regression in the history of consumer computing.



    Apple set the bench mark for tablets. By the way E-readers are not tablets, at least not in the sense of an iPad as the definition of a tablet device.

    Quote:



    2. Polarization angle, which makes the iPad's screen blank in portrait orientation with good (polarized) sunglasses. Most mobile applications (and vehicle mounts, like a pilot's kneeboard) call for the device to be upright (in portrait orientation); and in these environments people are often wearing sunglasses. But Apple has failed to have its manufacturer polarize the screen at the appropriate angle. Therefore, it's only visible in landscape orientation:



    Too lazy to lift those glasses?

    Quote:





    This needs to be reversed. It makes no sense to give priority to landscape orientation for sunglass-wearers. They're not watching movies with sunglasses on.



    Maybe they do? What do you think pilots do in the cockpit for all those hours. Even if you get a stewardess to jump you bones, that at best only lasts for an hour or two. So they watch movies, play games or whatever and then over shoot the airport by 20 minutes. It is a reality of modern flight that pilots don't do much these days in the cockpit.



    The Air France crash in the Alantic awhile ago points this out completely. With a dead navigational system and the autopilot discountected the pilots didn't have the skill required to recover the plane.
  • Reply 22 of 50
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macwise View Post


    A-Freaking-Men



    The old Prof pretty much summed it up and left no loose ends. I've gone to many movies over the years and frankly have only had a couple of positive 3D experiences. It just isn't a experience worth paying for.
  • Reply 23 of 50
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    The Air France crash in the Alantic awhile ago points this out completely. With a dead navigational system and the autopilot discountected the pilots didn't have the skill required to recover the plane.



    For starters, I wanna go on record saying that the idiots flying that plane were the cause of the accident, not the airplane. That's been proven by the "black boxes" that were finally recovered from the bottom of the Atlantic. In fact, the airspeed instrumentation failure was temporary, and was working just fine when they actually crashed. The navigation system was NEVER a problem. The way they "tried" to recover that airplane would have caused a crash in even the most basic airplane. It's hard to imagine what they might have been thinking, as the idiot in the right seat responded exactly opposite of how he was trained to.

    Do some actual research about what happened, it'll keep you from looking quite so stupid.





    As for the glossy/matte argument... I think Apple did it right... there are people that like each category. If you like glossy, then use it as is. If you want matte, it's as simple as a "screen protector".

    If it started out matte though, there'd be no way to make it glossy.
  • Reply 24 of 50
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    I agree 100% with the comment about quality, it is like Hollywood has lost its soul or has been taken over by the occupy movement. Nothing good and original has come from that part of the world for a few years now. Instead we get a constant stream of remakes, half baked rewrites of fairly good novels and a bunch of senseless drivel.



    Now the latest move seems to be to reach into the old catalog of movies and play them again Sam. Not that I'm against that but it seems to be done from a condition of weakness rather than strength. In case you are wondering one of the movies coming back to the big screen is Titanic.



    I'm to the point now that I actually believe that 3D movies actually result Ina negative impact at the box offices. Think about it they want to charge you more for an experience that is notably less satisfying!



    3D for the most part is a rip off! More importantly Hollywood has lost its mojo!



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    In terms of content, it's not really gonna change. Movie quality has been trending downward for a good long while now. When the best blockbusters Hollywood has to offer are already in 3D and people don't really care, it makes me think that's not the issue.



    What would have made people accept 3D is lack of glasses. Who wants to wear glasses to watch a movie/tv/game/whatever? And what about the people who ALREADY wear glasses?







    It's just not? you know.



  • Reply 25 of 50
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,472moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MobiusStrip View Post


    1. GLOSS.

    2. Polarization angle



    What they really need is a display that emits circularly polarised light:



    http://www.patentlyapple.com/patentl...-film-ban.html

    http://www.patentlyapple.com/patentl...zed-light.html



    That could quite possibly be used to kill two birds with one stone. Circularly polarised light won't be blocked by your glasses and incoming light that is bounced off either the panel surface or the glass panel, can be linearly polarised. Then they just put a perpendicularly polarised layer to block reflected light allowing the circularly polarised light to be emitted.



    This may in fact explain the 3rd cable. While a retina display would be nice, it's probably one of the least important things to sort on the iPad and it means it renders content more slowly while also using more RAM. If they can do both retina + polarising, great but I would rather they prioritised the latter.
  • Reply 26 of 50
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    In case you are wondering one of the movies coming back to the big screen is Titanic.



    Ah, yes. At least it'll be nice to be able to download a 1080p version of it and keep filling out my collection. Coincidentally, I'm currently WATCHING that with Rifftrax.



    Cameron seems to be notorious for idea taking, because not only is the love story based on two passengers on the real ship, it was already DONE in '47 in a movie about the Titanic.



    Fall in love, diamond necklace, man dies, that whole schtick.



    Quote:

    More importantly Hollywood has lost its mojo!



    Why did I just… think of Austin Powers…
  • Reply 27 of 50
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KingOfSomewhereHot View Post


    For starters, I wanna go on record saying that the idiots flying that plane were the cause of the accident, not the airplane. That's been proven by the "black boxes" that were finally recovered from the bottom of the Atlantic. In fact, the airspeed instrumentation failure was temporary, and was working just fine when they actually crashed. The navigation system was NEVER a problem. The way they "tried" to recover that airplane would have caused a crash in even the most basic airplane. It's hard to imagine what they might have been thinking, as the idiot in the right seat responded exactly opposite of how he was trained to.

    Do some actual research about what happened, it'll keep you from looking quite so stupid.



    I beg your pardon? We basically are saying the same thing here, the pilot couldn't fly the airplane. It doesn't matter if the instrumentation interruption was temporary or not, the pilot screwed up.



    Further you can not really say that the navigation system was never a problem as it is what caused the pilot to do the things he did in the cockpit. Frankly it is kinda twisted to imply that.

    Quote:





    As for the glossy/matte argument... I think Apple did it right... there are people that like each category. If you like glossy, then use it as is. If you want matte, it's as simple as a "screen protector".

    If it started out matte though, there'd be no way to make it glossy.



    I believe Apple did it right also. However if it had started out matte I honestly believe iPad would have been a failure. The screen is critical to delivering the good experience iPad does to the majority of users.
  • Reply 28 of 50
    Regarding three cables:



    display port use 20 pins cable and can support 17.28 Gbit/s or:



    2,560 × 1,600 × 30 bit @120 Hz



    so why would you need to add secondary cable for 2,560 × 1,600 ??
  • Reply 29 of 50
    ssquirrelssquirrel Posts: 1,196member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    3D devices have already failed. It's been two or three consecutive years now that the manufacturers have been pushing 3D TV's and gaming machines down everyone's throat and pretty much no one has bought into the idea yet.





    Global sales from the week before christmas, courtesy of vgchartz.com:



    3DS \t1,786,398\t(+19%) \t14,284,618





    I wouldn't say NO ONE has bought into the idea of 3D.
  • Reply 30 of 50
    ssquirrelssquirrel Posts: 1,196member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by kovacm View Post


    Regarding three cables:



    display port use 20 pins cable and can support 17.28 Gbit/s or:



    2,560 × 1,600 × 30 bit @120 Hz



    so why would you need to add secondary cable for 2,560 × 1,600 ??



    "the extra cable in the photo is thought to provide for the bandwidth necessary to power a display capable of Retina display-like resolutions."



    I read this as power bandwidth, not video bandwidth. More power needs pushed to teh screen and just 2 cables is not enough
  • Reply 31 of 50
    herbapouherbapou Posts: 2,227member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post


    Global sales from the week before christmas, courtesy of vgchartz.com:

    3DS \t1,786,398\t(+19%) \t14,284,618

    I wouldn't say NO ONE has bought into the idea of 3D.



    Could be because they are so cheap now. But I think the next big thing for TV's is going to be an app ecosystem like the rumor upcoming AppleTV. Google is at it too.



    I still thinks a 3d glass free iPod touch would make sense for gaming at some point.
  • Reply 32 of 50
    Just my thoughts as a screenwriter here in Hollywood re: content, 3D, etc. The majority of the time one watches a movie, it is produced for the viewer to 'watch' the story, not be 'inside' the experience. In 3D, you, in essence, break the forth wall and the viewer gets immersed 'into' the film to a certain degree. So, 3D isn't necessarily better nor is all viewing enhanced by it. I do think some, relatively few, viewing experiences lend well here, but trust me.... most people enjoy being 'outside' the story, it's what we've been programmed to like, understand. Remember, it's Moving Pictures, pictures tell a story, 3D is a different animal entirely... But what do I know, I write comedy. I do agree that a lot of content coming outta Tinseltown --stinks. Sadly, 3 dimensions won't help.... My 2 cents. Peace.
  • Reply 33 of 50
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by asdasd View Post


    yeah those are the most important things ever.



    Isn't a mobius strip something that goes on and on and on but never really gets anywhere?
  • Reply 34 of 50
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post


    Global sales from the week before christmas, courtesy of vgchartz.com:



    3DS \t1,786,398\t(+19%) \t14,284,618





    I wouldn't say NO ONE has bought into the idea of 3D.





    my comment is really an aside to this thread - but, I think most of us understand that current forays into 3D are mere adolescent, precipitative fumblings which create market buzz for true 3D (holographic, for lack of more futuristic terminology) displays which will one day arrive upon our desks or living room walls in one form or another. Despite that, current 3D is as boring as the difference between Betamax and VHS.
  • Reply 35 of 50
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post


    Global sales from the week before christmas, courtesy of vgchartz.com:



    3DS \t1,786,398\t(+19%) \t14,284,618



    I wouldn't say NO ONE has bought into the idea of 3D.



    All we know is they bought a handeld game console. We don't know if they bought it over a competitor because of the 3D display.



    It's like saying that everything that bought a MBA or MBP this quarter bought it because of Thunderbolt. Surely only a few bought it with the idea of buying a Pegasus NAS, and a few more wishing more TB capable peripherals would come along shortly, but most surely didn't buy it for the idea of TB.
  • Reply 36 of 50
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MobiusStrip View Post


    This would be typical of Apple. Introduce a pointlessly higher-resolution screen (wasting memory and processing resources) instead of addressing the two problems that plague the current screens:



    1. GLOSS. Apple continues to embarrass itself with ignorant glossy screens. Since when does a "leader" take cues from the third-tier plastic schlock being peddled at Best Buy? If you're Apple, since about five years ago. Meanwhile, E-readers clearly demonstrate the superiority of matte screens. Glossy screens are the biggest regression in the history of consumer computing.



    2. Polarization angle, which makes the iPad's screen blank in portrait orientation with good (polarized) sunglasses. Most mobile applications (and vehicle mounts, like a pilot's kneeboard) call for the device to be upright (in portrait orientation); and in these environments people are often wearing sunglasses. But Apple has failed to have its manufacturer polarize the screen at the appropriate angle. Therefore, it's only visible in landscape orientation:



    .





    This needs to be reversed. It makes no sense to give priority to landscape orientation for sunglass-wearers. They're not watching movies with sunglasses on.



    Good post, if a bit exaggerated
  • Reply 37 of 50
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    Glossy (as you call them) screens have been the single biggest advancement to LCD technology in history. Beyond that a touch screen isn't going to hold up to well if made of soft materials matte screens are made of.



    Apple set the bench mark for tablets. By the way E-readers are not tablets, at least not in the sense of an iPad as the definition of a tablet device.



    Glossy has been available for quite some time. It seems like a lot of earlier lcd displays had superior antiglare coatings to those available today. I don't mean laptop displays. I mean displays that used expensive panels. Later crts actually trended toward anti glare coatings and away from glossy. It'll change again at some point.



    I agree with you on E-readers, but E-readers are pretty awesome for their intended purpose. The kindle gives you something where the words actually resemble printed text. It lacks glare and weird levels of contrast that can be a strain on the eyes. I actually wonder what the impact of tablets will be on phones and laptops in a few years. I feel the potential to send text/email and make calls via skype on a tablet will eventually slow repurchasing cycles on phones if the tablet really does become a laptop replacement. Note I didn't say it would make phones unnecessary. Those can be placed in the pocket and held up to the ear, but it may make the current 1-2 year upgrade cycle less appealing, especially for those who don't buy heavily subsidized phones (mostly outside the US).







    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    Maybe they do? What do you think pilots do in the cockpit for all those hours. Even if you get a stewardess to jump you bones, that at best only lasts for an hour or two. So they watch movies, play games or whatever and then over shoot the airport by 20 minutes. It is a reality of modern flight that pilots don't do much these days in the cockpit.




    That made me laugh, especially the idea that they could continue on for an hour or two uninterrupted while flying a plane.
  • Reply 38 of 50
    alfiejralfiejr Posts: 1,524member
    in order of priority:



    1. significantly lighter weight, with likely a carbon fiber shell replacing the aluminum. i use my iPad a lot. the iPad 1 was very tiring to hold for more than a few minutes. the iPad 2 is much better, but still wears you out after a while to hold it. shaving more ounces off the iPad 3 would make it much easier to use for many people.



    2. better/stereo speakers. audio really does matter much of the time, and there is a lot of room for improvement here.



    3. longer battery life. you can never have too much.



    4. retina display. this is a virtual certainty, but is really just eye-candy, not a functional improvement. nevertheless it will be very nice to use.



    5. a smooth volume slider button. the current rocker button is a pain to use. or add touch and brightness slider controls in the bezel.



    6. Bluetooth 4.0. this is a high probability. the next generation of accessories will take at least a year to come to market. but connecting directly and interactively with other iOS devices without needing wifi would be something with a lot of possibilities now.



    7. on-demand 4G. 4G is a battery hog and expensive. but it sure is nice to have when you really need it and free wifi is not available. as an option you could turn on when wanted, and with a pay-as-you-go plan, it would be great. (in 2-3 years 4G will become the universal standard anyway, just like 3G replaced 2G only a few years ago.)



    and for the accompanying iOS 5.x update:



    a. widgets. this is one really good feature of Android and Windows Phone that Apple really needs to stop being in denial about and "emulate." a wifi/3G/Blutooth widget is a must. i am so tired of having to go to the Settings over and over and over for those. and third party widgets would open up many new possibilities.



    b. ?
  • Reply 39 of 50
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Alfiejr View Post


    …carbon fiber…



    That's crazy.



    Quote:

    … a smooth volume slider button.



    Ew. Those never work well and they're quite easy to bump.



    Quote:

    …touch and brightness slider controls in the bezel.



    That's what the Multitasking Bar is for.



    Quote:

    a wifi/3G/Blutooth widget is a must



    For the two people that actually turn Wi-Fi off.



    Quote:

    i am so tired of having to go to the Settings over and over and over for those



    So don't turn it off! Bluetooth and 3G I can understand, but why are you turning them on/off so frequently as for this to be a problem?



    Quote:

    …and third party widgets would open up many new possibilities.



    What was it, that one hacked-together app that gave you these controls in the Notification Center…?
  • Reply 40 of 50
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    No way is 3D being added, and no one on Earth makes TEN INCH, 2048x1536 autostereoscopic panels.



    Good thing we got our hands on crashed alien saucer technology. The greys had that long ago.
Sign In or Register to comment.