I guess it might be useful to have a second iPad while the primary one is recharging...
I was thinking more of a scenario where the large one is used mostly at home and the smaller one is useful for using when going outside or on the subway, etc.
The iPad 2 isn't the recent design of the iPad, the iPad 3 is. As for your speculation of the iMac... I think that'll be an interesting one to watch for. I think it could go either way. Many here, including you, were rather incredulous a RMBP would be possible, yet it appeared despite the lack of evidence it was possible to manufacture the screens for them, nor was there any evidence the GPUs could handle the needed resolutions. Thoseare certainly legitimate concerns. Be that as it may, for my part, I think the fact there was no bump to the iMacs when they bumped the Mac Pros and MBA and cMBPs suggests something is up. However, given the reports of lag on the RMBP (which isn't a problem on my particular unit), I could see Apple waiting for Haswell to release a Retina iMac.
My bets are 90% chance that iMac and iPad-mini are not retina. Retina displays are simply too expensive and too difficult to make to be the default screen resolution, and just as important, the hardware necessary to drive that many pixels is also too expensive and power-hungry. The engineering and manufacturing of displays and GPUs will have to improve; the time is not now and not this year.
Yeah, I see it more as a women's thing too, and for semi-men who use man-purses.
But you're right, men will love it, because their women will be happy with the smaller device, and the men will save money too.
Yep, don't give her a "dozen roses" all at once! Give her one rose a week for 12 weeks to minimize the expense and maximize the effect! I don't remember where I learned that! Probably from some cheap bastard!
<strong>Apple may ensure availability of 7.85-inch displays for a new, smaller iPad by using the same display technology already found on the iPhone 3GS, according to one new prediction.</strong>
Apple only once downgraded a product line from IPS to TN and found it wasn't such a great idea. It would prevent people flocking to the lower model while covering the budget market but I think it would degrade the experience too much. If Android tablets can ship in that size with IPS/PLS/OLED, the iPad Mini can too.
This iPad Mini rumour, like the TV, has also been swirling around for a while now:
My bets are 90% chance that iMac and iPad-mini are not retina. Retina displays are simply too expensive and too difficult to make to be the default screen resolution, and just as important, the hardware necessary to drive that many pixels is also too expensive and power-hungry. The engineering and manufacturing of displays and GPUs will have to improve; the time is not now and not this year.
For the iPad Mini, there is another very good reason not to make it retina - it would require developers to add another resolution to the mix.
If they use the same resolution as the iPhone, most existing iPhone apps will work, but with larger buttons and features. It's not ideal, but certainly workable.
Apple will do retina displays when they're good and ready.
Apple will do retina displays when the cost of them falls.
It's all about the cost of materials. Apple is able to put a retina display in the new MBP because it commands a premium price as their flagship laptop.
They can put retina displays in the iPhone and iPad because they are able to buy the components in massive quantities at a significant discount.
When the cost of the retina displays fall as the manufacturing yield rates rise and the manufacturing volumes increase I fully expect to see retina displays in all of Apples' products over the coming years.
You also have to factor in the product differentiation amongst Apples' product lines. The iPhone is their flagship product so it has a better screen than the iPod. The MBP is their flagship laptop so it gets a better screen than the MBA. Gradually as other factors come into play and the cost of materials fall the retina displays become less of a differentiating factor.
I don't. Although Gruber is usually reliable, he might be wrong this time.
If you do the math, using the same "sheets" from iPhone 3GS (480 x 360, 3.5") will give you a 7.47" screen that has a resolution of 1024 x 768. I don't see 7.85" coming out of that analysis. Am I wrong? Or is Gruber wrong?
3GS is 163 ppi. At XGA res it nets you a 6.28 x 4.71 with a 7.85" diagonal screen.
Would seem very, very un-Apple-like to build something using a technology that they've themselves superseded. Why not cut screens from the same sheets as the iPhone 4, vice 3GS?
Would seem very, very un-Apple-like to build something using a technology that they've themselves superseded. Why not cut screens from the same sheets as the iPhone 4, vice 3GS?
Because they want to maintain the 1028 x 768 form factor for apps compatibility. At the resolution of the iPhone 4 screen, that would make for a screen only a bit larger than the iPhone.
I don't. Although Gruber is usually reliable, he might be wrong this time.
If you do the math, using the same "sheets" from iPhone 3GS (480 x 360, 3.5") will give you a 7.47" screen that has a resolution of 1024 x 768. I don't see 7.85" coming out of that analysis. Am I wrong? Or is Gruber wrong?
How did you do the math? The result is 7.85" on the diagonal. Gruber links to an old post that does it. This was first done before the iPad launched so it doesn't mean it will happen but it does make sense from the point of using the display tech they have long since paid for to help reduce costs.
How did you do the math? The result is 7.85" on the diagonal. Gruber links to an old post that does it. This was first done before the iPad launched so it doesn't mean it will happen but it does make sense from the point of using the display tech they have long since paid for to help reduce costs.
I think the reason for 7.8" is for a 260 dpi screen at 1024 x 768. If Apple could figure out how to make it for under $120 (retail for $199), it will kill the Android tablet market.
Also the 7.8 inch would be perfect as personal organizer, portable game console, and a color e-reader.
Same display tech as the 3GS? Does that mean it won't get IPS? Or it's just a completely different process in the manufacturing of a display?
Because even the Nexus 7 will have IPS.
That's a good point, and I don't really believe this rumor to begin with.
TN is garbage compared to IPS screens. It wouldn't be like Apple to release a 7.85" tablet that has a crap TN screen. It doesn't need to be retina, but at least use an IPS screen.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by christopher126
Somebody said it before me, women are going to "dig" on the iPad 7"
And their husbands/boyfriends are going to be buying them for them in droves because of the lower price!
You heard it here first...errrr, I mean second!
Yeah, I see it more as a women's thing too, and for semi-men who use man-purses.
But you're right, men will love it, because their women will be happy with the smaller device, and the men will save money too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe98
I guess it might be useful to have a second iPad while the primary one is recharging...
I was thinking more of a scenario where the large one is used mostly at home and the smaller one is useful for using when going outside or on the subway, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky
Well, the retina display would certainly separate the Apple 7" iPad from all the also-rans. A justification for a price difference too.
Good point!
Quote:
Originally Posted by johndoe98
The iPad 2 isn't the recent design of the iPad, the iPad 3 is. As for your speculation of the iMac... I think that'll be an interesting one to watch for. I think it could go either way. Many here, including you, were rather incredulous a RMBP would be possible, yet it appeared despite the lack of evidence it was possible to manufacture the screens for them, nor was there any evidence the GPUs could handle the needed resolutions. Thoseare certainly legitimate concerns. Be that as it may, for my part, I think the fact there was no bump to the iMacs when they bumped the Mac Pros and MBA and cMBPs suggests something is up. However, given the reports of lag on the RMBP (which isn't a problem on my particular unit), I could see Apple waiting for Haswell to release a Retina iMac.
My bets are 90% chance that iMac and iPad-mini are not retina. Retina displays are simply too expensive and too difficult to make to be the default screen resolution, and just as important, the hardware necessary to drive that many pixels is also too expensive and power-hungry. The engineering and manufacturing of displays and GPUs will have to improve; the time is not now and not this year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][
Yeah, I see it more as a women's thing too, and for semi-men who use man-purses.
But you're right, men will love it, because their women will be happy with the smaller device, and the men will save money too.
Yep, don't give her a "dozen roses" all at once! Give her one rose a week for 12 weeks to minimize the expense and maximize the effect! I don't remember where I learned that! Probably from some cheap bastard!
Apple only once downgraded a product line from IPS to TN and found it wasn't such a great idea. It would prevent people flocking to the lower model while covering the budget market but I think it would degrade the experience too much. If Android tablets can ship in that size with IPS/PLS/OLED, the iPad Mini can too.
This iPad Mini rumour, like the TV, has also been swirling around for a while now:
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/08/17/7-inch-ipad-to-launch-by-christmas/
They need to start putting use-by dates on them. Let's say if it doesn't happen at the 2013 refresh, maybe it's time to let go of the idea.
For the iPad Mini, there is another very good reason not to make it retina - it would require developers to add another resolution to the mix.
If they use the same resolution as the iPhone, most existing iPhone apps will work, but with larger buttons and features. It's not ideal, but certainly workable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Apple will do retina displays when they're good and ready.
Apple will do retina displays when the cost of them falls.
It's all about the cost of materials. Apple is able to put a retina display in the new MBP because it commands a premium price as their flagship laptop.
They can put retina displays in the iPhone and iPad because they are able to buy the components in massive quantities at a significant discount.
When the cost of the retina displays fall as the manufacturing yield rates rise and the manufacturing volumes increase I fully expect to see retina displays in all of Apples' products over the coming years.
You also have to factor in the product differentiation amongst Apples' product lines. The iPhone is their flagship product so it has a better screen than the iPod. The MBP is their flagship laptop so it gets a better screen than the MBA. Gradually as other factors come into play and the cost of materials fall the retina displays become less of a differentiating factor.
Exactly! I did this calculation a long time ago:
1024 squared + 768 squared = 1280 squared. (1280 relative pixels diagonal on 1024x768)
1280 pixels / 7.85 inches = 163 pixels per inch.
(The iPhone 3GS has the same 163 pixels per inch.)
3GS is 163 ppi. At XGA res it nets you a 6.28 x 4.71 with a 7.85" diagonal screen.
I guess I was too slow, gatortpk beat me.
Would seem very, very un-Apple-like to build something using a technology that they've themselves superseded. Why not cut screens from the same sheets as the iPhone 4, vice 3GS?
Quote:
Originally Posted by gatortpk
Exactly! I did this calculation a long time ago:
1024 squared + 768 squared = 1280 squared. (1280 relative pixels diagonal on 1024x768)
1280 pixels / 7.85 inches = 163 pixels per inch.
(The iPhone 3GS has the same 163 pixels per inch.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
3GS is 163 ppi. At XGA res it nets you a 6.28 x 4.71 with a 7.85" diagonal screen.
I guess I was too slow, gatortpk beat me.
You guys are right. Thx.
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinthe408
Would seem very, very un-Apple-like to build something using a technology that they've themselves superseded. Why not cut screens from the same sheets as the iPhone 4, vice 3GS?
Because they want to maintain the 1028 x 768 form factor for apps compatibility. At the resolution of the iPhone 4 screen, that would make for a screen only a bit larger than the iPhone.
How did you do the math? The result is 7.85" on the diagonal. Gruber links to an old post that does it. This was first done before the iPad launched so it doesn't mean it will happen but it does make sense from the point of using the display tech they have long since paid for to help reduce costs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
How did you do the math? The result is 7.85" on the diagonal. Gruber links to an old post that does it. This was first done before the iPad launched so it doesn't mean it will happen but it does make sense from the point of using the display tech they have long since paid for to help reduce costs.
I just made a stupid mistake.
I think the reason for 7.8" is for a 260 dpi screen at 1024 x 768. If Apple could figure out how to make it for under $120 (retail for $199), it will kill the Android tablet market.
Also the 7.8 inch would be perfect as personal organizer, portable game console, and a color e-reader.
Because even the Nexus 7 will have IPS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by yvvv
Same display tech as the 3GS? Does that mean it won't get IPS? Or it's just a completely different process in the manufacturing of a display?
Because even the Nexus 7 will have IPS.
That's a good point, and I don't really believe this rumor to begin with.
TN is garbage compared to IPS screens. It wouldn't be like Apple to release a 7.85" tablet that has a crap TN screen. It doesn't need to be retina, but at least use an IPS screen.
On second thought, Apple does use a TN screen on the iPod Touch, so who knows, maybe a cheaper, smaller iPad would use one?
But, that would be a huge mistake though, IMO, and I don't think that Apple is that stupid.