<span style="line-height:1.4em;">You would have to have your nose pressed against the screen to detect stereo separation.</span>
It seems to me that the distance between the speakers isn’t the actual issue here.
Rather that the angle formed between the speakers and the listener (and, on a small enough scale, the quadrilateral formed involving both ears) is important.
4K in what regard? Do you think they'll go full UHD/QFHD or are we talking something that approaches the number of pixels in a 4K UHD display but still built on a 4:3 aspect ration.
If they keep 4:3, like they have done with all iPads thus far, and we assume the 9.7" model with a PPI of 263.92 will be used for the larger model then we get 2574 x 1935 for a PPI of 263.95. However, I would bet that they can make the icons and basic elements larger because of the larger display, just like with the iPhone 6 Plus.
Note that sticking with 4:3 would mean a lot more surface area and therefore pixels than with a 16:9 display if they are trying to achieve the same PPI as some QFHD display for that size.
Thanks for these calculations. Sorry I can't participate beyond the easy speculation that of course that's where we're headed, it likely won't be an ungainly 16:9, and it may or even should happen on the first iteration. I'm just going on instinct, now that we have the first larger oxide display in the iMac.
Thanks for these calculations. Sorry I can't participate beyond the easy speculation that of course that's where we're headed, it likely won't be an ungainly 16:9, and it may or even should happen on the first iteration. I'm just going on instinct, now that we have the first larger oxide display in the iMac.
I agree that 16:9 might be ungainly, but would it allow for 2x 4x3 apps that are between the 7.85" and 9.7" devices when side-by-side?
Thanks for these calculations. Sorry I can't participate beyond the easy speculation that of course that's where we're headed, it likely won't be an ungainly 16:9, and it may or even should happen on the first iteration. I'm just going on instinct, now that we have the first larger oxide display in the iMac.
Not sure why you would refer 16:9 as ungainly, you do realize that Apple's entire product base except for their tablets use 16:9 as their aspect ratio. Could you imagine using a 4:3 screen on an iMac or even the Mac Pro, yucky, the horror. On a tablet though 4:3 is nice for reading content though, than again I prefer using my Kindle HDX for such things and that has a 16:9 aspect ratio but I would prefer a 4:3 for such things. It really depends on what your priorities are, if gaming and watching videos are your thing than using a 16:9/10 display is defiantly the way to go. Personally, I would like to see the aspect ratio 3:2 used more, it's actually a really good compromise between 16:9 and 4:3, still looks good while reading magazines, e-books, etc. and you don't get as big black bars on the top and bottom like you do with 4:3. I do like 4:3 when using my music apps though, big reason why I like having multiple devices, each one has their own special strengths and of course weaknesses.
My iPads kick ass when it comes music creation apps, just love'em to death for that but I'm not a fan of using them for watching videos, 4:3, lack of built in HDMI and Miracast, etc. My Nokia 2520 on the other hand is absolutely perfect for watching videos and TV, 16:9, built in HDMI and Miracast but it's not a very comfortable tablet for reading or other media content. My Kindle HDX is a really darling of a tablet for media consumption and e-books do to it's long lasting battery and lightweight construction, that's really it though, doing any actually work on it is an absolute pain. My Nexus 9, well that's just a development machine for me and I have no plans on extending it's role. I will have to replace my Kindle HDX soon and will probably get the new Nokia N9 when it's released, the battery in the Kindle is starting to drain quicker now do to me using it all day, constantly charging and discharging. The Nokia N1 looks like the perfect replacement too, great specs for an excellent price and of course 4:3, Plus all of my e-books that I bought from Amazon are supported.
I give up. If people want to think these idiotic names are real, or if Apple wants to use idiotic names as real names, so be it. It’s only a very important aspect of the product’s marketing, but whatever.
Just hoping for 4096x3072.
People want to think about idiotic names... Apple wants to use it: iPhone 6 Plus
The Mini still awaits an oxide-backed screen, i..e., IGZO, which will go far to address cooling issues. I think the lack of this one critical display element is the reason the Mini Retina has seemed so half-baked from the beginning. We shall see when the new one comes out.
As to your point about the resolution on the big iPad, the only authority (!) i've seen weigh in is Tallest Skil, who hopes it will be 4K. Me too. That would be one nice piece of glass to hold in your lap, and it will instantly make sense why a bigger iPad has to be. Love at first sight, and all that. But there again, it will depend on IGZO supply. I wish I could find some tech writer with the curiosity to look into this story. It's behind the absence of a 4K monitor from Apple, behind the gimped Mini, and maybe behind the absence of an Apple or Foxconn TV. Some here think it's just a buzzword. It's actually the core technology that justifies the continued development of LCD large displays.
Interesting. Do you have any links where I can learn about IGZO?
The Mini still awaits an oxide-backed screen, i..e., IGZO, which will go far to address cooling issues. I think the lack of this one critical display element is the reason the Mini Retina has seemed so half-baked from the beginning. We shall see when the new one comes out.
As to your point about the resolution on the big iPad, the only authority (!) i've seen weigh in is Tallest Skil, who hopes it will be 4K. Me too. That would be one nice piece of glass to hold in your lap, and it will instantly make sense why a bigger iPad has to be. Love at first sight, and all that. But there again, it will depend on IGZO supply. I wish I could find some tech writer with the curiosity to look into this story. It's behind the absence of a 4K monitor from Apple, behind the gimped Mini, and maybe behind the absence of an Apple or Foxconn TV. Some here think it's just a buzzword. It's actually the core technology that justifies the continued development of LCD large displays.
No, the roadmap is that two OS's will eventually merge, and the A-series CPU will eventually replace Intel. But, that is very, very far in the future. In the meanwhile, each generation OS will get a little closer to looking the same, and the A-series to leap a bit more closer in computing power to the current generation Intel chips of its day.
Not sure why you would refer 16:9 as ungainly, you do realize that Apple's entire product base except for their tablets use 16:9 as their aspect ratio. Could you imagine using a 4:3 screen on an iMac or even the Mac Pro, yucky, the horror. On a tablet though 4:3 is nice for reading content though, than again I prefer using my Kindle HDX for such things and that has a 16:9 aspect ratio but I would prefer a 4:3 for such things. It really depends on what your priorities are, if gaming and watching videos are your thing than using a 16:9/10 display is defiantly the way to go. Personally, I would like to see the aspect ratio 3:2 used more, it's actually a really good compromise between 16:9 and 4:3, still looks good while reading magazines, e-books, etc. and you don't get as big black bars on the top and bottom like you do with 4:3. I do like 4:3 when using my music apps though, big reason why I like having multiple devices, each one has their own special strengths and of course weaknesses.
My iPads kick ass when it comes music creation apps, just love'em to death for that but I'm not a fan of using them for watching videos, 4:3, lack of built in HDMI and Miracast, etc. My Nokia 2520 on the other hand is absolutely perfect for watching videos and TV, 16:9, built in HDMI and Miracast but it's not a very comfortable tablet for reading or other media content. My Kindle HDX is a really darling of a tablet for media consumption and e-books do to it's long lasting battery and lightweight construction, that's really it though, doing any actually work on it is an absolute pain. My Nexus 9, well that's just a development machine for me and I have no plans on extending it's role. I will have to replace my Kindle HDX soon and will probably get the new Nokia N9 when it's released, the battery in the Kindle is starting to drain quicker now do to me using it all day, constantly charging and discharging. The Nokia N1 looks like the perfect replacement too, great specs for an excellent price and of course 4:3, Plus all of my e-books that I bought from Amazon are supported.
It's an interesting question, and you have a lot more experience with the variables than most, especially me. I just go by a sort of geometric preference about proportion, maybe the same way the Golden Section operates on all of us, maybe the same way the Apple designers decide these things as well.
Different form factors tolerate or ask for different aspect ratios. The iPhone 5/5S is barely acceptable to my sense of proportion. Tablets in 16:9 have always felt alienating to me, because their form insists on being used in landscape only, whereas the iPad format just feels right in either mode. True, movies ask for 16:9, but that has always seemed to me to be a tyranny left over from the movie theater, and I really dislike that ratio in something you hold in your hands. So I can't get worked up over black bars and letterboxing.
Finally, I'd rather the portable tablet win than Hollywood, because I really, really dislike what H'wood has done to the world, having lived in the belly of the beast for the last 44 years. But that's really personal, isn't it. I don't see Apple being at odds with the movie biz, especially with its Pixar & Disney connections. Given those connections, it's remarkable they haven't given in to 16:9 on tablets. They must feel strongly about it as well.
To your other point, with laptops and desktops, a wider aspect is totally acceptable. It's something to do with being anchored at the bottom, or on the wall as with TV. Now you're into the realm of the "picture window," as they used to call it it real estate, when suburban "ranch houses" had one big, wide front-facing piece of glass. Weird, isn't it. Maybe that's where the Hollywood impresarios got their stupid widescreen from. Others will say it matches the aspect ratio of our vision, but I think that's nonsense.
Interesting. Do you have any links where I can learn about IGZO?
Y'know, it's strange, but I don't remember seeing any overview articles on the subject, like you might expect when a shift in technology like this comes along. I've just pieced a view together by poking around with search terms that include Apple, IGZO, Sharp, LTPS and others you'll likely come across. It's a story that needs to be written, and it's something the old Scientific American of 20 years ago would have done by now, but that kind of thinking journalism has gone away for the time being.
Some sources we do have can't be trusted, like Raymond Soneira of Display Mate, who can't seem to grasp the concept of production realities, and who seems to have no long perspective on LCD technology, only a gee-whiz attitude toward OLED.
By the way, you quoted my comment twice by mistake above.
Edit: this info ad from Sharp isn't so bad, if you click into the expert stories on the left:
Not sure why you would refer 16:9 as ungainly, you do realize that Apple's entire product base except for their tablets use 16:9 as their aspect ratio.
The Macbook Pro (arguably the most popular Mac) is 16:10 (2880/1800 = 1.6 = 16/10)
It seems to me that the distance between the speakers isn’t the actual issue here.
Rather that the angle formed between the speakers and the listener (and, on a small enough scale, the quadrilateral formed involving both ears) is important.
Actually, imagine a game like the old Merlin electronic game of the 1980's, with multi colored buttons flashing in patterns that you have to memorize around the screen. Each time a button flashes or is pressed, a corresponding tone sounds at the speaker closest to the button. That is one good use of its 4 speaker design, for example.
Y'know, it's strange, but I don't remember seeing any overview articles on the subject, like you might expect when a shift in technology like this comes along. I've just pieced a view together by poking around with search terms that include Apple, IGZO, Sharp, LTPS and others you'll likely come across. It's a story that needs to be written, and it's something the old Scientific American of 20 years ago would have done by now, but that kind of thinking journalism has gone away for the time being.
Some sources we do have can't be trusted, like Raymond Soneira of Display Mate, who can't seem to grasp the concept of production realities, and who seems to have no long perspective on LCD technology, only a gee-whiz attitude toward OLED.
By the way, you quoted my comment twice by mistake above.
Edit: this info ad from Sharp isn't so bad, if you click into the expert stories on the left:
Oh, yes, I remember now seeing an article here about Apple's new strategic partnership with Sharp and how it was expected that Apple would use this alliance to bring this technology to its products.
Things do take time. With Apple, it seems they take more time to bring things to market than their competitors. That's not a bad thing since these things are being done right and not rushed to market.
I've been dreaming about a large format tablet this size since the first iPhone was unveiled. However, given almost 8 years of updates and revisions to the UI of iOS. I'm not sure if i'm ready to fully accept this as a viable product. There has to be several things change in iOS before i'd really welcome a tablet this size.
1. handwriting recognition and Apple implemented HW stylus support. I'm a creative pro (an Architect) and taking notes on drawings (PDF format) and taking meeting notes in the stock notes App (as well as system-wide integration) would be the primary purpose for me using a large format Tablet. Right now I have an iPad Air and these things are sorely missed since the first iPad. I've said it a million times. The iPad is the perfect form-factor and product to fully replace the traditional paper note pad. However there is no System-wide support for physical note taking outside of an on-screen keyboard. If you want the iPad to replace your notepads and field notes, you're gonna have to make the iPad function like them.
2. Mark-up and Preview. These are two apps/features just now implemented into OS X that I now use on a regular basis that need to be on the iPad. Along with system-wide stylus support, allowing for Mark-ups on Drawings or photos in Email and a stock "Preview" app are two things that I really need on a daily basis in order to do my work.
I know these two wish-list features are sorely missed and I know full-well that there are 3rd party solutions to this, but these are features Apple really needs to "Sherlock" in order for me to buy into a large-format iPad. Not only would these system-wide features be useful to creative professionals, but also to the vast diversity of the customer base. I can see so may applications that could use system-wide stylus and hand-writing integration that i'm really shocked it hasn't been implemented yet.
Yes, I'm fully aware Steve Jobs hated stylii but i think this is the use-case where he was wrong. And I know taking a couple generation of iOS would sort of weed out all the non-use cases where a stylus can be considered a crutch. But, in the case of drawing and writing, the keyboard and your finger just don't do it. People have been using some form of a stylus for millennia, and I don't think a finger-based touch interface is going to be the death nail to that kind of legacy.
I can live without multi-window tasking and all the other wish-list features people crave for iOS. I really think the two points i've made above are key to the future development of the iOS platfrom and the iPad in HW.
I really don't mind the name iPad Air Plus. I know some people expected iPad Pro but Apple knows what they are doing and if it turns out to be iPad Plus then they will have done that for a very specific purpose.
The Pro moniker, to me, means without limitations. If it is running iOS there will be limitations, unlike a Mac Pro or a Macbook Pro running OS X.
Secondly, if they are intending to market this to education, they would be better off without the "pro" designation in my opinion.
I really don't mind the name iPad Air Plus. I know some people expected iPad Pro but Apple knows what they are doing and if it turns out to be iPad Plus then they will have done that for a very specific purpose.
The Pro moniker, to me, means without limitations. If it is running iOS there will be limitations, unlike a Mac Pro or a Macbook Pro running OS X.
Secondly, if they are intending to market this to education, they would be better off without the "pro" designation in my opinion.
those are hoping for an iPad Pro are those want it to run OSX or at the very least an operating system more capable than iOS. If this device truly is named iPad Air Plus, that tells me it's just an iPad Air with a bigger screen with a couple extra iOS UI elements specific for this device (ie: split-screen multitasking). But again, who knows.
Comments
What if one is thick-headed?
Thanks for these calculations. Sorry I can't participate beyond the easy speculation that of course that's where we're headed, it likely won't be an ungainly 16:9, and it may or even should happen on the first iteration. I'm just going on instinct, now that we have the first larger oxide display in the iMac.
I agree that 16:9 might be ungainly, but would it allow for 2x 4x3 apps that are between the 7.85" and 9.7" devices when side-by-side?
Not sure why you would refer 16:9 as ungainly, you do realize that Apple's entire product base except for their tablets use 16:9 as their aspect ratio. Could you imagine using a 4:3 screen on an iMac or even the Mac Pro, yucky, the horror. On a tablet though 4:3 is nice for reading content though, than again I prefer using my Kindle HDX for such things and that has a 16:9 aspect ratio but I would prefer a 4:3 for such things. It really depends on what your priorities are, if gaming and watching videos are your thing than using a 16:9/10 display is defiantly the way to go. Personally, I would like to see the aspect ratio 3:2 used more, it's actually a really good compromise between 16:9 and 4:3, still looks good while reading magazines, e-books, etc. and you don't get as big black bars on the top and bottom like you do with 4:3. I do like 4:3 when using my music apps though, big reason why I like having multiple devices, each one has their own special strengths and of course weaknesses.
My iPads kick ass when it comes music creation apps, just love'em to death for that but I'm not a fan of using them for watching videos, 4:3, lack of built in HDMI and Miracast, etc. My Nokia 2520 on the other hand is absolutely perfect for watching videos and TV, 16:9, built in HDMI and Miracast but it's not a very comfortable tablet for reading or other media content. My Kindle HDX is a really darling of a tablet for media consumption and e-books do to it's long lasting battery and lightweight construction, that's really it though, doing any actually work on it is an absolute pain. My Nexus 9, well that's just a development machine for me and I have no plans on extending it's role. I will have to replace my Kindle HDX soon and will probably get the new Nokia N9 when it's released, the battery in the Kindle is starting to drain quicker now do to me using it all day, constantly charging and discharging. The Nokia N1 looks like the perfect replacement too, great specs for an excellent price and of course 4:3, Plus all of my e-books that I bought from Amazon are supported.
I give up. If people want to think these idiotic names are real, or if Apple wants to use idiotic names as real names, so be it. It’s only a very important aspect of the product’s marketing, but whatever.
Just hoping for 4096x3072.
People want to think about idiotic names... Apple wants to use it: iPhone 6 Plus
What's next? iPhone Air Plus? iPhone 7 Plus Plus?
It's an interesting question, and you have a lot more experience with the variables than most, especially me. I just go by a sort of geometric preference about proportion, maybe the same way the Golden Section operates on all of us, maybe the same way the Apple designers decide these things as well.
Different form factors tolerate or ask for different aspect ratios. The iPhone 5/5S is barely acceptable to my sense of proportion. Tablets in 16:9 have always felt alienating to me, because their form insists on being used in landscape only, whereas the iPad format just feels right in either mode. True, movies ask for 16:9, but that has always seemed to me to be a tyranny left over from the movie theater, and I really dislike that ratio in something you hold in your hands. So I can't get worked up over black bars and letterboxing.
Finally, I'd rather the portable tablet win than Hollywood, because I really, really dislike what H'wood has done to the world, having lived in the belly of the beast for the last 44 years. But that's really personal, isn't it. I don't see Apple being at odds with the movie biz, especially with its Pixar & Disney connections. Given those connections, it's remarkable they haven't given in to 16:9 on tablets. They must feel strongly about it as well.
To your other point, with laptops and desktops, a wider aspect is totally acceptable. It's something to do with being anchored at the bottom, or on the wall as with TV. Now you're into the realm of the "picture window," as they used to call it it real estate, when suburban "ranch houses" had one big, wide front-facing piece of glass. Weird, isn't it. Maybe that's where the Hollywood impresarios got their stupid widescreen from. Others will say it matches the aspect ratio of our vision, but I think that's nonsense.
Y'know, it's strange, but I don't remember seeing any overview articles on the subject, like you might expect when a shift in technology like this comes along. I've just pieced a view together by poking around with search terms that include Apple, IGZO, Sharp, LTPS and others you'll likely come across. It's a story that needs to be written, and it's something the old Scientific American of 20 years ago would have done by now, but that kind of thinking journalism has gone away for the time being.
Some sources we do have can't be trusted, like Raymond Soneira of Display Mate, who can't seem to grasp the concept of production realities, and who seems to have no long perspective on LCD technology, only a gee-whiz attitude toward OLED.
By the way, you quoted my comment twice by mistake above.
Edit: this info ad from Sharp isn't so bad, if you click into the expert stories on the left:
http://online.wsj.com/ad/igzo
Not sure why you would refer 16:9 as ungainly, you do realize that Apple's entire product base except for their tablets use 16:9 as their aspect ratio.
The Macbook Pro (arguably the most popular Mac) is 16:10 (2880/1800 = 1.6 = 16/10)
Actually, imagine a game like the old Merlin electronic game of the 1980's, with multi colored buttons flashing in patterns that you have to memorize around the screen. Each time a button flashes or is pressed, a corresponding tone sounds at the speaker closest to the button. That is one good use of its 4 speaker design, for example.
Wow, technology has caught up to the 80's! Lol
Oh, yes, I remember now seeing an article here about Apple's new strategic partnership with Sharp and how it was expected that Apple would use this alliance to bring this technology to its products.
Things do take time. With Apple, it seems they take more time to bring things to market than their competitors. That's not a bad thing since these things are being done right and not rushed to market.
I've been dreaming about a large format tablet this size since the first iPhone was unveiled. However, given almost 8 years of updates and revisions to the UI of iOS. I'm not sure if i'm ready to fully accept this as a viable product. There has to be several things change in iOS before i'd really welcome a tablet this size.
1. handwriting recognition and Apple implemented HW stylus support. I'm a creative pro (an Architect) and taking notes on drawings (PDF format) and taking meeting notes in the stock notes App (as well as system-wide integration) would be the primary purpose for me using a large format Tablet. Right now I have an iPad Air and these things are sorely missed since the first iPad. I've said it a million times. The iPad is the perfect form-factor and product to fully replace the traditional paper note pad. However there is no System-wide support for physical note taking outside of an on-screen keyboard. If you want the iPad to replace your notepads and field notes, you're gonna have to make the iPad function like them.
2. Mark-up and Preview. These are two apps/features just now implemented into OS X that I now use on a regular basis that need to be on the iPad. Along with system-wide stylus support, allowing for Mark-ups on Drawings or photos in Email and a stock "Preview" app are two things that I really need on a daily basis in order to do my work.
I know these two wish-list features are sorely missed and I know full-well that there are 3rd party solutions to this, but these are features Apple really needs to "Sherlock" in order for me to buy into a large-format iPad. Not only would these system-wide features be useful to creative professionals, but also to the vast diversity of the customer base. I can see so may applications that could use system-wide stylus and hand-writing integration that i'm really shocked it hasn't been implemented yet.
Yes, I'm fully aware Steve Jobs hated stylii but i think this is the use-case where he was wrong. And I know taking a couple generation of iOS would sort of weed out all the non-use cases where a stylus can be considered a crutch. But, in the case of drawing and writing, the keyboard and your finger just don't do it. People have been using some form of a stylus for millennia, and I don't think a finger-based touch interface is going to be the death nail to that kind of legacy.
I can live without multi-window tasking and all the other wish-list features people crave for iOS. I really think the two points i've made above are key to the future development of the iOS platfrom and the iPad in HW.
I really don't mind the name iPad Air Plus. I know some people expected iPad Pro but Apple knows what they are doing and if it turns out to be iPad Plus then they will have done that for a very specific purpose.
The Pro moniker, to me, means without limitations. If it is running iOS there will be limitations, unlike a Mac Pro or a Macbook Pro running OS X.
Secondly, if they are intending to market this to education, they would be better off without the "pro" designation in my opinion.
I really don't mind the name iPad Air Plus. I know some people expected iPad Pro but Apple knows what they are doing and if it turns out to be iPad Plus then they will have done that for a very specific purpose.
The Pro moniker, to me, means without limitations. If it is running iOS there will be limitations, unlike a Mac Pro or a Macbook Pro running OS X.
Secondly, if they are intending to market this to education, they would be better off without the "pro" designation in my opinion.
those are hoping for an iPad Pro are those want it to run OSX or at the very least an operating system more capable than iOS. If this device truly is named iPad Air Plus, that tells me it's just an iPad Air with a bigger screen with a couple extra iOS UI elements specific for this device (ie: split-screen multitasking). But again, who knows.