so, anything different than 480x320, 960x640 and 1024x768 is now "non-standard" ?
Actually, that should read:
Quote:
Other platforms have introduced a variety of non-standard resolutions [and aspect ratios] on various new phones that developers will need to test against, complicating their efforts.
By non-standard, the author doesn't mean that they aren't common, but that other mobile platforms, such as Android, don't enforce standardization of resolutions and aspect ratios.
I'm guessing you're talking about theoretical, as opposed to shipping functionality.
I mean, there's no way you'd want to run an iPad app (designed for a 9.5" touchscreen) on an iPhone 4's 3.5" touchscreen.
The touch targets (and text and graphics) would appear miniscule. The app would be, for all practical purposes, unusable, and SJ would certainly never allow this travesty.
Exactly! This is why I've questioned even 800 x 480 displays on phones. There's no way all that extra resolution can be used in a way that will fully exploit the resolution. I've noticed that even in the high rez phones, just a bit more data is on screen. The smallest fonts on my 3G are already getting too small for readability.
The reasons Apple is using it is the only valid reason for such a high rez display in a phone. Older apps rez up perfectly. Just a bit of anti-aliasing will result in better looking apps, and it will work on my iPad well enough as is.
This is another reason to not support the 2G. The sooner the older 480 x 320 devices are off the market, the quicker app developers will be able to just focus on the new display. Another two years before the 3GS is gone.
I can't believe you people are still spreading this FUD.
Remember, Soneira used the 0.6 arcmin resolution of the eye, but that’s for perfect eyesight. Most people don’t have perfect eyesight. I sure don’t. A better number for a typical person is more like 1 arcmin resolution, not 0.6. In fact, Wikipedia lists 20/20 vision as being 1 arcmin, so there you go.
If I use 1 arcminute instead, the scale factor is smaller, about 3438. So let’s convert that to inches to see how small a pixel the human eye can resolve at a distance of one foot:12 inches / 3438 = 0.0035 inches
Aha! This means that to a more average eye, pixels smaller than this are unresolved. Since the iPhone’s pixels are 0.0031 inches on a side, it works! Jobs is actually correct.
If 65% of the population have 20/20 vision or worse how is it not a "retina display" to the vast majority of people who don't have Dr. Soneira's "best case scenario" on 20/12 eyesight.
Ahh! This time you beat me.
The facts on eyesight is that just a small percent have "perfect" vision.
But there is a problem with that "fact" that the good Doctor didn't mention, or isn't aware of. And that's that it's measured at 20 feet, which for our 28mm eye lens is considered to be at infinity. At 12"s the situation changes, in that most people with that prefect vision will have less than perfect vision at that close distance.
So it's just a small percentage of a small percentage.
In addition, that vision test is done with a high contrast target which gives the highest acuity. When contrast is lowered, acuity drops off rapidly. As most elements on displays are lower in contrast, acuity will be lower for them. The truth is that acuity varies for the same person.
But there is a problem with that "fact" that the good Doctor didn't mention, or isn't aware of. And that's that it's measured at 20 feet, which for our 28mm eye lens is considered to be at infinity. At 12"s the situation changes, in that most people with that prefect vision will have less than perfect vision at that close distance.
So it's just a small percentage of a small percentage.
In addition, that vision test is done with a high contrast target which gives the highest acuity. When contrast is lowered, acuity drops off rapidly. As most elements on displays are lower in contrast, acuity will be lower for them. The truth is that acuity varies for the same person.
That's an interesting point. I wonder what the average vision is at 12".
At 16" I can no longer differentiate a pixel on my 162ppi iPhone, yet I have 20/15 in one eye and 20/20 or 20/25 in the other as of my last eye exam in early 2009.
so, anything different than 480x320, 960x640 and 1024x768 is now "non-standard" ?
What was meant is that in other phones, there is no resolution that is used on the majority of them with the same OS. You can find phones coming out AT THE SAME TIME with a number of different resolutions. In addition, none of those resolutions are exact multiples of each other the way Apple has done for the phone. Those Android apps must be used with the proper resolution phone, which means that when an app is downloaded for a particular phone, it has that particular resolution, with possibly a slightly different interface, with a different amount of info present on it, making it a hassle for developers. None is therefor "standard" for that platform. And remember, it's per platform. For Apple, the standards are 480 x 320 which will be gone in another one or two years. The new 960 x 640 phone Touch resolution, and the current iPad resolution.
The point is that developers can depend on them. They can't depend on anything in Android, for example, where Google has approved several different resolutions for phones, and will no doubt have several more for tablets, once they begin to approve tablet use for Android, which they haven't as yet, even though some Android tablets have been shown.
iOS4 will redraw text in unmodified iPhoneOS3 apps, to take advantage of the higher density pixels. However, iPad doesn't do this when it doubles the size of iPhoneOS3 apps. So this feature, one presumes, will come to the iPad when it gets iOS4
The VGA output of the iPad supports 720p content according to various tests, but not for any DRM content. So if you film a 720p video, you should be able to VGA it to your plasma at 720p if you have the right cable and connector.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theappmachine
The iOs 4 has some scalable gui so cocoa touch library elements will not appear miniscule.
If an iPad app was shrunk onto an iPhone size screen, but the elements automatically rescaled themselves while the rest of the interface shrunk, it'd be all out of whack.
No, an iPad app won't run without modification on an iPhone4.
Several high end competing smartphone devices now support HDMI output, although (somewhat ironically), these devices don't really have access to sync legitimately licensed HD media from sources such as iTunes or Blu-Ray Digital Copy, and therefore can only play what they don't have, rather than not being able to play what they do have, as iPhone 4 and iPad.
This is the single biggest missed opportunity for the iPhone.
Apple could have, potentially, sold a bluetooth remote and a HDMI cable and made every iPhone4 a defacto AppleTV.
People would have plugged their iPhone in for a quick and easy rental, or to add youtube to their TV etc. What a pity!
That's an interesting point. I wonder what the average vision is at 12".
At 16" I can no longer differentiate a pixel on my 162ppi iPhone, yet I have 20/15 in one eye and 20/20 or 20/25 in the other as of my last eye exam in early 2009.
As we get older, we can't focus as well close up. It's called presbyopia. It's why, at some point, we get reading glasses. Also, most people get cataracts as they get older. I just went through that, which was a horror for me. Most cataracts aren't serious enough for surgery, but they're there. Not everyone will get them, but most people will, to some degree. Most don't even know they have them.
Several high end competing smartphone devices now support HDMI output, although (somewhat ironically), these devices don't really have access to sync legitimately licensed HD media from sources such as iTunes or Blu-Ray Digital Copy, and therefore can only play what they don't have, rather than not being able to play what they do have, as iPhone 4 and iPad.
They take HD video and play it back on your big screen TV.
WTF?
And what does "...rather than not being able to play what they do have, as iPhone 4 and iPad" mean?
I think it says that that the iPad cannot play what it does have. Huh?
Exactly! This is why I've questioned even 800 x 480 displays on phones. There's no way all that extra resolution can be used in a way that will fully exploit the resolution.
You can watch movies at a more satisfying resolution. Isn't that enough?
And for a lot of people, the 3GS is a retina display, eh?
According to Dr. Soneira's calculations everyone can hold the iPhone 3GS 3 feet away from their eyes before they can no longer differentiate a pixel.
You can try this at home. How far away does any current iPhone or Touch have to be before you can't see separate pixels? I bet it's well less than 3 feet for almost everybody.
Comments
Other platforms have introduced a variety of non-standard resolutions
so, anything different than 480x320, 960x640 and 1024x768 is now "non-standard" ?
so, anything different than 480x320, 960x640 and 1024x768 is now "non-standard" ?
Actually, that should read:
Other platforms have introduced a variety of non-standard resolutions [and aspect ratios] on various new phones that developers will need to test against, complicating their efforts.
By non-standard, the author doesn't mean that they aren't common, but that other mobile platforms, such as Android, don't enforce standardization of resolutions and aspect ratios.
Hey, Captain Dumbfck, the Magic Mouse isn't really magical, either. Turns out, it's just technology. Begin complaining..... now!
The mouse connects to a magical device...
Is it possible to control such presentations from a remote control (Bluetooth or whatever)?
That would be the ultimate presentation tool in your pocket! No need to carry the laptop with you!!!
Please stop calling it a "retina display" lol, that marketing fallacy was debunked over here:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/19840...a_display.html
Still the best display out there but I am not the only one to just hate marketing misleading falsehoods, whoever is spreading them.
Android lovers cannot take the heat?
Funny how Apple is the only USA company fighting Asian dominance in this area, and Apple is tiny.
I'm guessing you're talking about theoretical, as opposed to shipping functionality.
I mean, there's no way you'd want to run an iPad app (designed for a 9.5" touchscreen) on an iPhone 4's 3.5" touchscreen.
The touch targets (and text and graphics) would appear miniscule. The app would be, for all practical purposes, unusable, and SJ would certainly never allow this travesty.
Exactly! This is why I've questioned even 800 x 480 displays on phones. There's no way all that extra resolution can be used in a way that will fully exploit the resolution. I've noticed that even in the high rez phones, just a bit more data is on screen. The smallest fonts on my 3G are already getting too small for readability.
The reasons Apple is using it is the only valid reason for such a high rez display in a phone. Older apps rez up perfectly. Just a bit of anti-aliasing will result in better looking apps, and it will work on my iPad well enough as is.
This is another reason to not support the 2G. The sooner the older 480 x 320 devices are off the market, the quicker app developers will be able to just focus on the new display. Another two years before the 3GS is gone.
Please stop calling it a "retina display" lol, that marketing fallacy was debunked over here:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/19840...a_display.html
Still the best display out there but I am not the only one to just hate marketing misleading falsehoods, whoever is spreading them.
And that was debunked here:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/ba...ne-resolution/
I can't believe you people are still spreading this FUD.
Aha! This means that to a more average eye, pixels smaller than this are unresolved. Since the iPhone’s pixels are 0.0031 inches on a side, it works! Jobs is actually correct.
If 65% of the population have 20/20 vision or worse how is it not a "retina display" to the vast majority of people who don't have Dr. Soneira's "best case scenario" on 20/12 eyesight.
Ahh! This time you beat me.
The facts on eyesight is that just a small percent have "perfect" vision.
But there is a problem with that "fact" that the good Doctor didn't mention, or isn't aware of. And that's that it's measured at 20 feet, which for our 28mm eye lens is considered to be at infinity. At 12"s the situation changes, in that most people with that prefect vision will have less than perfect vision at that close distance.
So it's just a small percentage of a small percentage.
In addition, that vision test is done with a high contrast target which gives the highest acuity. When contrast is lowered, acuity drops off rapidly. As most elements on displays are lower in contrast, acuity will be lower for them. The truth is that acuity varies for the same person.
He is right, here is another link:
http://www.kybervision.com/Blog/file...naDisplay.html
Good catch. I hadn't seen that one.
But there is a problem with that "fact" that the good Doctor didn't mention, or isn't aware of. And that's that it's measured at 20 feet, which for our 28mm eye lens is considered to be at infinity. At 12"s the situation changes, in that most people with that prefect vision will have less than perfect vision at that close distance.
So it's just a small percentage of a small percentage.
In addition, that vision test is done with a high contrast target which gives the highest acuity. When contrast is lowered, acuity drops off rapidly. As most elements on displays are lower in contrast, acuity will be lower for them. The truth is that acuity varies for the same person.
That's an interesting point. I wonder what the average vision is at 12".
At 16" I can no longer differentiate a pixel on my 162ppi iPhone, yet I have 20/15 in one eye and 20/20 or 20/25 in the other as of my last eye exam in early 2009.
so, anything different than 480x320, 960x640 and 1024x768 is now "non-standard" ?
What was meant is that in other phones, there is no resolution that is used on the majority of them with the same OS. You can find phones coming out AT THE SAME TIME with a number of different resolutions. In addition, none of those resolutions are exact multiples of each other the way Apple has done for the phone. Those Android apps must be used with the proper resolution phone, which means that when an app is downloaded for a particular phone, it has that particular resolution, with possibly a slightly different interface, with a different amount of info present on it, making it a hassle for developers. None is therefor "standard" for that platform. And remember, it's per platform. For Apple, the standards are 480 x 320 which will be gone in another one or two years. The new 960 x 640 phone Touch resolution, and the current iPad resolution.
The point is that developers can depend on them. They can't depend on anything in Android, for example, where Google has approved several different resolutions for phones, and will no doubt have several more for tablets, once they begin to approve tablet use for Android, which they haven't as yet, even though some Android tablets have been shown.
The iOs 4 has some scalable gui so cocoa touch library elements will not appear miniscule.
If an iPad app was shrunk onto an iPhone size screen, but the elements automatically rescaled themselves while the rest of the interface shrunk, it'd be all out of whack.
No, an iPad app won't run without modification on an iPhone4.
Several high end competing smartphone devices now support HDMI output, although (somewhat ironically), these devices don't really have access to sync legitimately licensed HD media from sources such as iTunes or Blu-Ray Digital Copy, and therefore can only play what they don't have, rather than not being able to play what they do have, as iPhone 4 and iPad.
This is the single biggest missed opportunity for the iPhone.
Apple could have, potentially, sold a bluetooth remote and a HDMI cable and made every iPhone4 a defacto AppleTV.
People would have plugged their iPhone in for a quick and easy rental, or to add youtube to their TV etc. What a pity!
That's an interesting point. I wonder what the average vision is at 12".
At 16" I can no longer differentiate a pixel on my 162ppi iPhone, yet I have 20/15 in one eye and 20/20 or 20/25 in the other as of my last eye exam in early 2009.
As we get older, we can't focus as well close up. It's called presbyopia. It's why, at some point, we get reading glasses. Also, most people get cataracts as they get older. I just went through that, which was a horror for me. Most cataracts aren't serious enough for surgery, but they're there. Not everyone will get them, but most people will, to some degree. Most don't even know they have them.
Several high end competing smartphone devices now support HDMI output, although (somewhat ironically), these devices don't really have access to sync legitimately licensed HD media from sources such as iTunes or Blu-Ray Digital Copy, and therefore can only play what they don't have, rather than not being able to play what they do have, as iPhone 4 and iPad.
They take HD video and play it back on your big screen TV.
WTF?
And what does "...rather than not being able to play what they do have, as iPhone 4 and iPad" mean?
I think it says that that the iPad cannot play what it does have. Huh?
It was discussed here. For most people, it will still be a retina display...
And for a lot of people, the 3GS is a retina display, eh?
Exactly! This is why I've questioned even 800 x 480 displays on phones. There's no way all that extra resolution can be used in a way that will fully exploit the resolution.
You can watch movies at a more satisfying resolution. Isn't that enough?
You can watch movies at a more satisfying resolution. Isn't that enough?
You really think it will make a difference on a 3.2 to a 4.3 inch screen. I doubt that very much.
We aren't nearly as sensitive to resolution with moving images as we are with still images.
You're not going to hold the phone at the ideal distance for resolution. You're going to hold it at the most comfortable distance.
And for a lot of people, the 3GS is a retina display, eh?
According to Dr. Soneira's calculations everyone can hold the iPhone 3GS 3 feet away from their eyes before they can no longer differentiate a pixel.
You can try this at home. How far away does any current iPhone or Touch have to be before you can't see separate pixels? I bet it's well less than 3 feet for almost everybody.