Yes the viewing distance matters, but just because you can hold your iPad two inches from your face doesn't mean it isn't Retina. There are standard viewing distances that are tabulated on the basis of normal 20/20 vision. Sure that might not be "Retina" to you, but we are talking about a standardized definition and formula that is based on scientific research in optics.
I hope there's an option on Retinal "improvements." I'm worried about the greater demand on the battery and on graphics processors, such that the next models with better CPUs and GPUs will have lower frame rates on graphics heavy games. To say nothing of lower or no better battery life.
Can you imagine Dell or HP trying to keep up with this move from Apple? This will create a 3-4 year advantage to Apple. It's a home run
True.. but HP and Dell's volume sellers are $500-600 laptops. Even sales of their own Ultrabooks pale in comparison to sales of their regular ol' laptops.
I'm sure Apple's "Retina" laptops will look amazing... but $1,200 for a 13" and $1,800 for a 15" is still a premium price for a laptop.
That's not really a market HP and Dell goes after anyway.
Yes, and some could be all. Those iPad 2s that lack the updated A5 might just be old ones still in the supply chain. All of the new iPad 2s may have the updated A5.
Pick a size and we'll check. I'll bet each one turns out to be Retina.
I hope people realize that the descriptor "Retina" is only an Apple marketing term (besides the obvious biology description) and not some kind of catch-all term to describe image resolution. For the love of ****, please learn the difference.
I hope people realize that the descriptor "Retina" is only an Apple marketing term (besides the obvious biology description) and not some kind of catch-all term to describe image resolution. For the love of ****, please learn the difference.
I hope people realize that the descriptor "802.11n" is only an IEEE marketing term and not some kind of catch-all term to describe frequency bands. For the love of ****, please learn the difference.
I hope people realize that the descriptor "802.11n" is only an IEEE marketing term and not some kind of catch-all term to describe frequency bands. For the love of ****, please learn the difference.
The difference here being that I didn't use 802.11n in a sentence.
As ever, Apple will buy in bulk and drive down the price.
Indeed.
I wonder if that $3.7 billion (or whatever it was) "unique opportunity" investment that Tim Cook mentioned a while back might have something to do with retina displays for both iDevices and Macs. But either way, Apple will almost certainly not be paying as high a price as everyone else.
Retinas seem more likely to be an extra-cost option, because hi-res displays have been that way for years and (I would imagine) producing retina displays in high volume may be difficult. By making retinas optional, demand will be reduced such that supply can maintain pace, and Apple will still reap the reward of being first to market.
btw: the current iPad 2 has an old name but is new, as it contains an updated A5 processor.
The problem w/that is that if the better screens are a BTO option, Apple won't need to buy them in a quantity high enough to drive them down in price as far as they would like. IMO, if Apple is going to dive into these high res laptop displays, it will be w/both feet or not at all.
Isn't the updated A5 just a different nm size? It's still an A5, they didn't goose it up at all, it's just made smaller and more power efficient.
True.. but HP and Dell's volume sellers are $500-600 laptops. Even sales of their own Ultrabooks pale in comparison to sales of their regular ol' laptops.
I'm sure Apple's "Retina" laptops will look amazing... but $1,200 for a 13" and $1,800 for a 15" is still a premium price for a laptop.
That's not really a market HP and Dell goes after anyway.
While it's not necessarily their main focus, HP most certainly goes after that market. It took less than half a minute to find nine models on HP's site that start in that price range, three in those size categories, and each have options that can push the price up. That's the home and home office division. I found 62 Dells in that price and size range as well.
It's a lot more money than the competition, but there are a lot of people that think it's worth it. I've not found a lot of sub-$1k notebook to be that well built. Most of them I've seen have somewhat dodgy screens, creaky chassis or otherwise hokey build.
I hope people realize that the descriptor "802.11n" is only an IEEE marketing term and not some kind of catch-all term to describe frequency bands. For the love of ****, please learn the difference.
Sorry, but your analogy, sarcastic or not, is a miss and is consequently misleading.
Yes the viewing distance matters, but just because you can hold your iPad two inches from your face doesn't mean it isn't Retina. There are standard viewing distances that are tabulated on the basis of normal 20/20 vision. Sure that might not be "Retina" to you, but we are talking about a standardized definition and formula that is based on scientific research in optics.
True, but for TVs, the range is pretty wide - a factor of 2 or 3, IIRC. It could be 'retina' at the longer distance, but not the shorter one.
While it's not necessarily their main focus, HP most certainly goes after that market. It took less than half a minute to find nine models on HP's site that start in that price range, three in those size categories, and each have options that can push the price up. That's the home and home office division. I found 62 Dells in that price and size range as well.
It's a lot more money than the competition, but there are a lot of people that think it's worth it. I've not found a lot of sub-$1k notebook to be that well built. Most of them I've seen have somewhat dodgy screens, creaky chassis or otherwise hokey build.
Oh I know you can get an HP or Dell laptop in the $1200-1800 range.
My point was... if you want a 15" laptop from Apple.... it starts at $1800.
Other 15" laptops start at 1/3 of that price.
I do think Mac laptops are a good value for the money... when you consider OSX, iLife, build quality and all that jazz. I recommend Macs to people whenever I can (and if they can afford them)
But I was saying that the volume sellers for HP and Dell are much cheaper. I imagine their most popular models are somewhere around $600.
I think it's fairly safe to say Apple will keep the prices firm as always, but even if they won't I'd gladly pay $92 more for an IPS super high resolution laptop display. Whether you like Windows or OSX that's a killer hardware feature, and one that it will take a long time for others to match.
And to me and no doubt many others, this would be an even bigger deal than the iPad or iPhone retina displays, for more serious graphic work.
…but the iPhone 4s was announced 10/4/11, but not available in the US till 10/14/11.
Yes, but they allowed preorders. If they're planning to do that for the MacBook revision, that's fine, but I don't recall them ever doing preorders for a computer.
That's not really a market HP and Dell goes after anyway.
They are trying to push upwards with some recent models, but Apple is already established as a premium brand with higher prices. They can alternate between giving up some margin to push expensive new tech at the same price, and then reap larger profits when the new tech becomes mainstream. It is a wicked tick tock that is hard to compete with starting from a discount brand position.
I get the feeling that without a company pushing these advances over the complaints of bean counters, we would stagnate at 1920x1080 for another decade.
Yes the viewing distance matters, but just because you can hold your iPad two inches from your face doesn't mean it isn't Retina. There are standard viewing distances that are tabulated on the basis of normal 20/20 vision. ...
It depends on viewing distance, but it has little to do with normal 20/20 vision or the vision of any other individual. The criteria is for two adjacent points of light to be indistinguishable from a single source. The criteria is that the two light sources are separated by 1 minute of arc or less. This is 1/60 of 1°. Someone with a vision defect may see two sources blur into one for separations greater than this. However, it is an immutable law of physics that one cannot resolve sources with smaller separations no matter how good his vision is. Pick a viewing distance--let's say 6 feet or 72 inches. The pixel separation for a retina display is
d = (pi/180)(1/60)(72) = 2.0944E-2 inches
The pixel density is
1/d = 47.75 dpi
A standard 1080p HDTV with 46 in. diagonal measure display has this pixel density.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
And the viewing distance, as well.
Yes the viewing distance matters, but just because you can hold your iPad two inches from your face doesn't mean it isn't Retina. There are standard viewing distances that are tabulated on the basis of normal 20/20 vision. Sure that might not be "Retina" to you, but we are talking about a standardized definition and formula that is based on scientific research in optics.
Bring on the higher res. I saw an 80" Sharp at Costco. If we want wall screens without pixels the size of legos, we have to keep pushing the res.
I hope there's an option on Retinal "improvements." I'm worried about the greater demand on the battery and on graphics processors, such that the next models with better CPUs and GPUs will have lower frame rates on graphics heavy games. To say nothing of lower or no better battery life.
True.. but HP and Dell's volume sellers are $500-600 laptops. Even sales of their own Ultrabooks pale in comparison to sales of their regular ol' laptops.
I'm sure Apple's "Retina" laptops will look amazing... but $1,200 for a 13" and $1,800 for a 15" is still a premium price for a laptop.
That's not really a market HP and Dell goes after anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Only some.
Yes, and some could be all. Those iPad 2s that lack the updated A5 might just be old ones still in the supply chain. All of the new iPad 2s may have the updated A5.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe98
Pick a size and we'll check. I'll bet each one turns out to be Retina.
I hope people realize that the descriptor "Retina" is only an Apple marketing term (besides the obvious biology description) and not some kind of catch-all term to describe image resolution. For the love of ****, please learn the difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich
I hope people realize that the descriptor "Retina" is only an Apple marketing term (besides the obvious biology description) and not some kind of catch-all term to describe image resolution. For the love of ****, please learn the difference.
I hope people realize that the descriptor "802.11n" is only an IEEE marketing term and not some kind of catch-all term to describe frequency bands. For the love of ****, please learn the difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe98
I hope people realize that the descriptor "802.11n" is only an IEEE marketing term and not some kind of catch-all term to describe frequency bands. For the love of ****, please learn the difference.
The difference here being that I didn't use 802.11n in a sentence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichL
As ever, Apple will buy in bulk and drive down the price.
Indeed.
I wonder if that $3.7 billion (or whatever it was) "unique opportunity" investment that Tim Cook mentioned a while back might have something to do with retina displays for both iDevices and Macs. But either way, Apple will almost certainly not be paying as high a price as everyone else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro
Retinas seem more likely to be an extra-cost option, because hi-res displays have been that way for years and (I would imagine) producing retina displays in high volume may be difficult. By making retinas optional, demand will be reduced such that supply can maintain pace, and Apple will still reap the reward of being first to market.
btw: the current iPad 2 has an old name but is new, as it contains an updated A5 processor.
The problem w/that is that if the better screens are a BTO option, Apple won't need to buy them in a quantity high enough to drive them down in price as far as they would like. IMO, if Apple is going to dive into these high res laptop displays, it will be w/both feet or not at all.
Isn't the updated A5 just a different nm size? It's still an A5, they didn't goose it up at all, it's just made smaller and more power efficient.
Depends on what you mean by new. The new model? iPad 2 will still be sold new until the next update.
While it's not necessarily their main focus, HP most certainly goes after that market. It took less than half a minute to find nine models on HP's site that start in that price range, three in those size categories, and each have options that can push the price up. That's the home and home office division. I found 62 Dells in that price and size range as well.
It's a lot more money than the competition, but there are a lot of people that think it's worth it. I've not found a lot of sub-$1k notebook to be that well built. Most of them I've seen have somewhat dodgy screens, creaky chassis or otherwise hokey build.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe98
I hope people realize that the descriptor "802.11n" is only an IEEE marketing term and not some kind of catch-all term to describe frequency bands. For the love of ****, please learn the difference.
Sorry, but your analogy, sarcastic or not, is a miss and is consequently misleading.
True, but for TVs, the range is pretty wide - a factor of 2 or 3, IIRC. It could be 'retina' at the longer distance, but not the shorter one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe98
Pick a size and we'll check. I'll bet each one turns out to be Retina.
At what distance?
I think it's a bad comparison but it's also a interesting topic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot_pitch
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixel_density
Oh I know you can get an HP or Dell laptop in the $1200-1800 range.
My point was... if you want a 15" laptop from Apple.... it starts at $1800.
Other 15" laptops start at 1/3 of that price.
I do think Mac laptops are a good value for the money... when you consider OSX, iLife, build quality and all that jazz. I recommend Macs to people whenever I can (and if they can afford them)
But I was saying that the volume sellers for HP and Dell are much cheaper. I imagine their most popular models are somewhere around $600.
I think it's fairly safe to say Apple will keep the prices firm as always, but even if they won't I'd gladly pay $92 more for an IPS super high resolution laptop display. Whether you like Windows or OSX that's a killer hardware feature, and one that it will take a long time for others to match.
And to me and no doubt many others, this would be an even bigger deal than the iPad or iPhone retina displays, for more serious graphic work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
iPad, sure. When they weren't already selling a product in that field. Apple will not announce a new computer unless you can buy it that day.
Lol, okay, I guess I am nitpicking, then, but the iPhone 4s was announced 10/4/11, but not available in the US till 10/14/11.
That isn't 6-8 weeks, to be sure, and it isn't, in the popular conception, a 'computer'...
but I'm pretty sure its a field they had products in already ;-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by boredumb
…but the iPhone 4s was announced 10/4/11, but not available in the US till 10/14/11.
Yes, but they allowed preorders. If they're planning to do that for the MacBook revision, that's fine, but I don't recall them ever doing preorders for a computer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip
That's not really a market HP and Dell goes after anyway.
They are trying to push upwards with some recent models, but Apple is already established as a premium brand with higher prices. They can alternate between giving up some margin to push expensive new tech at the same price, and then reap larger profits when the new tech becomes mainstream. It is a wicked tick tock that is hard to compete with starting from a discount brand position.
I get the feeling that without a company pushing these advances over the complaints of bean counters, we would stagnate at 1920x1080 for another decade.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe98
Yes the viewing distance matters, but just because you can hold your iPad two inches from your face doesn't mean it isn't Retina. There are standard viewing distances that are tabulated on the basis of normal 20/20 vision. ...
It depends on viewing distance, but it has little to do with normal 20/20 vision or the vision of any other individual. The criteria is for two adjacent points of light to be indistinguishable from a single source. The criteria is that the two light sources are separated by 1 minute of arc or less. This is 1/60 of 1°. Someone with a vision defect may see two sources blur into one for separations greater than this. However, it is an immutable law of physics that one cannot resolve sources with smaller separations no matter how good his vision is. Pick a viewing distance--let's say 6 feet or 72 inches. The pixel separation for a retina display is
d = (pi/180)(1/60)(72) = 2.0944E-2 inches
The pixel density is
1/d = 47.75 dpi
A standard 1080p HDTV with 46 in. diagonal measure display has this pixel density.