I kind of expect Apple to stick with 1024x768 for cost and availability reasons, giving the iPad 2 some color/contrast improvements but nothing close to a “retina display.”
But if they DO bump up the res, I predict they’ll still maintain 1024x768 on the lowest model(s) to keep the entry cost low, and to relieve pressure on makers of the higher-res new display. (Maybe they’ll keep selling the iPad 1 as a low-end model, the way they still sell the iPhone 3GS.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
The AMOLED situation will hurt Apple somewhat. Not a lot, but it will have an impact.
You make an interesting point that a company that only sells a few devices can incorporate new components that aren’t yet widely available. However, by definition, without large-scale mass production, such components won’t impact the market as much, nor build up a large user base.
AMOLED’s nice in total darkness. So is the current iPad (not AS nice with the blacks, but still nice)... but an even better iPad display is likely coming soon. Meanwhile, in many other ways, for many other situations, AMOLED is inferior. ALMOED won’t affect iPad sales nor customer satisfaction significantly.
The best quality display now, in the widest range of usage scenarios, with the longest device life, is enhanced IPS LCD (not the original IPS) with an LED backlight, and high resolution. That’s what Apple offers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Based on new evidence the iPad’s display resolution will not be updated for the iPad 2.
Because hidden camera icons found in 4.3 beta are at the same old res? I thought the same thing when I read that.
Now, Apple could just be smart enough not to bundle the high-res assets and give too much away, so there’s still SOME hope. A little. But higher-res 10” panels just sound cost-prohibitive to me. I’d love to be wrong, but it feels like wishful thinking.
I kind of expect Apple to stick with 1024x768 for cost and availability reasons, giving the iPad 2 some color/contrast improvements but nothing close to a “retina display.”
But if they DO bump up the res, I predict they’ll still maintain 1024x768 on the lowest model(s) to keep the entry cost low, and to relieve pressure on makers of the higher-res new display. (Maybe they’ll keep selling the iPad 1 as a low-end model, the way they still sell the iPhone 3GS.)
1) I have a feeling the lowest capacity cellular models will be dropped along with the highest capacity WiFi model as these seem to be the weakest sellers. This will mean 2xWiFi-only, 2xWiFi+GSM/UMTS, and 2xWiFi=CDMA/EVDO. That’s still 6 total models just like they have now.
2) I think the display could get a brighter yet more power efficient backlight and the display components melded together like the iPhone 4’s display making it look better and making it thinner. IOW, it will be improved,even if the resolution stays the same.
3) The iPad is a Retina Display, you just have to hold it more than 26” away from your eyes.
3438 x 1/132 ppi = 26”
Quote:
Because hidden camera icons found in 4.3 beta are at the same old res? I thought the same thing when I read that.
Now, Apple could just be smart enough not to bundle the high-res assets and give too much away, so there’s still SOME hope. A little. But higher-res 10” panels just sound cost-prohibitive to me. I’d love to be wrong, but it feels like wishful thinking.
Yeah, I thought about that, too, but Apple hasn’t tried to be that clever in the past. Weren’t there icons and pointers to the 960x640 display in iOS 4.0 betas?
No, they're not bright at all. In fact, even the best of them are dim when compared to a good Backlit LCD, and I'm really tired of reading how bright they are. Even the latest generation of AMOLEDs from Samsung are much dimmer than the iPhone 4 screen.
So you conclude, probably from reading a datasheet of an old product. But I have a prototype in front of me, and it is MUCH brighter than my iPhone LCD is. I can control the brightness through linux, 0-255. It is painful to the eyes, literally, when the brightness is above 100.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
Isn’t that a straw man argument since LCD’s require a backlight or are you saying that OLEDs are brighter than LED backlights? Anecdotally, the iPhone 4’s LED backlight beats any AMOLED device I’ve compared it to.
OLEDs are still probably one generation away from being good enough for devices like the iPhone/iPad, but the brightness issue has clearly been solved in the newest gen. As far as the backlight, you could increase the power of the backlight, but then you are draining power. OLEDs only use power where they are being illuminated. LCDs operate on the principle of blocking the backlight.
The Taiwanese industry publication reported in December that constrained supplies of AMOLED screens would keep the display from Apple's next-generation iPad. The Cupertino, Calif., company will reportedly stick with an LCD screen for the second-generation tablet.
Well, you know what this means--AMOLED for iPad 2.
I for one think LCD is very mature and Apple's iOS devices should stick with it instead of the pen tile crap used by the AMOLED screens. A Retina Display for iPad 2 would be a welcome surprise, but I'm not holding my breath for it.
... apple and SJ have worked their contracts and volumes-best price, best volumes best delivery date. SJ is fleet of foot, and we know who will win the race. ...
Agree. Apple has already cornered the flash memory market. They are the largest consumer of flash memory in the world, and thus get the lowest per-unit prices. Other manufacturers are forced to out-bid each other for the rest of the available supply, which hurts their margins.
Apple has also avoided paying off-the-shelf prices for their A4 chips, since they use their own custom design. That has probably cooled off the Intel relationship a bit. Remember when Apple used to get new Intel CPUs first? Not any more. (And, as an aside, even Microsoft has announced that Windows 8 will be ported to ARM. Two whole years from now at the earliest.)
Now Apple is working hard to get the best deals on touchscreen displays. Considering that iPad has about 96% of the pad computing market at the moment, it looks like Apple can get those deals.
As for AMOLED, let's remember that Apple doesn't blindly adopt the latest technology. Yes, Apple's industrial design is cutting edge, and yes, Steve can be eager use new technology. But only if it's mature enough to mass-produce, and only if it suits Apple's long-term goals.
Apple never directly supported Blu-Ray and never will. Plastic discs don't help Apple rent or sell videos on iTunes, so Blu-Ray gets thrown down the useless technology staircase. AMOLED screens just aren't quite good enough yet in color accuracy, brightness, and still cost too much. But when those problems are solved I'm sure Apple will join the party. AMOLED-based touchscreens can and will help Apple make even thinner iDevices. And Apple will be able to leverage their mass-purchasing power to get the best deals. All over again.
My samsung phone uses SAMOLED and you can tell the pixels are spaced when reading text on websites. I think if ipad went this way, it would be a step backwards to a lot of people.
So you conclude, probably from reading a datasheet of an old product. But I have a prototype in front of me, and it is MUCH brighter than my iPhone LCD is. I can control the brightness through linux, 0-255. It is painful to the eyes, literally, when the brightness is above 100.
Have they solved the OLED degradation factor yet. iPhones remain some of the most long lasting devices in the market. We can probably expect the same from the iPad. If the screen is going to appreciably degrade before its average life expectancy, that might reflect badly on Apple's top quality reputation.
OLED screens "pop" and appear vividly coloured to the average person, and that sells. They also have ridiculously great contrast and probably would work well in the average television set sold at WalMart.
Amoled screens remind me of the flouro on black velvet pictures of Elvis you could buy in the seventies, no doubt they appeal to the same people why buy "art" at Walmart.
>insert sad clown emoticon here<
Quote:
Originally Posted by emulator
That may be true for the decades before but not anymore; today I'd would not say Apple make the best displays per picture quality or color accuracy.
Colour accuracy and Amoled could not possibly belong in the same sentence, garish, overly bright reds put paid to that.
Based on new evidence the iPad?s display resolution will not be updated for the iPad 2.
Just curious - Does anyone hereabouts have any real objection or hardship with the current iPad display? I have played extensively with a friend's iPad and to these 68-year-old eyes, the screen looks great. I haven't noticed any eye fatigue or other vision issues, but of course, everyone's different.
Just curious - Does anyone hereabouts have any real objection or hardship with the current iPad display? I have played extensively with a friend's iPad and to these 68-year-old eyes, the screen looks great. I haven't noticed any eye fatigue or other vision issues, but of course, everyone's different.
I wish the display was brighter and glass had a more effective oleophobic coating. My first request could eliminate much of my 2nd request. That?s only real issue with it I have. Higher resolution would be nice, but I don?t expect nor will I feel Apple personally attacked me if it?s not updated.
Based on new evidence the iPad?s display resolution will not be updated for the iPad 2.
Who knows? A new report today said that it would be. Me? I'm not going to speculate or worry about it. We've got less than two months to go before it's here, and less than that before Jobs tells us what it's got.
Who knows? A new report today said that it would be. Me? I'm not going to speculate or worry about it. We've got less than two months to go before it's here, and less than that before Jobs tells us what it's got.
The evidence to which I refer are the 1024x768 shutter and camera images found iOS for iPad v4.3b1. Images that would make no sense to include unless it's software misdirection or they plan to release to release new iPads with cameras and multiple display resolutions. To me, both sound un-Apple-like.
I’m much more inclined to believe some visual evidence than a rumour of an undefined “retina display” and some other very crazy things.
So you conclude, probably from reading a datasheet of an old product. But I have a prototype in front of me, and it is MUCH brighter than my iPhone LCD is. I can control the brightness through linux, 0-255. It is painful to the eyes, literally, when the brightness is above 100.
From handling the latest Samsung, and also reading the test reports and comparisons of the se new models with other models out. I haven' yet seen what I'd call a bright AMOLED. A lot of people are fooled by the dark black. The whites seem to "pop". But it still isn't very bright.
Quote:
OLEDs are still probably one generation away from being good enough for devices like the iPhone/iPad, but the brightness issue has clearly been solved in the newest gen. As far as the backlight, you could increase the power of the backlight, but then you are draining power. OLEDs only use power where they are being illuminated. LCDs operate on the principle of blocking the backlight.
We really can't talk about prototypes. I've got lots of prototypes here. Some are better than others. I have a small Kodak panel that's VERY bright. But the lifetime is too short. Until they're IN a product, they don't matter. What we must talk about is what exists. And from what I see, so far, none of the phones that are out with AMOLEDS are all that bright.
Even in the test report I'm linking to, the photo's of the phones are useless. They are obviously not in a situation where brightness can be used as a comparison, as they're indoors, and auto brightness is being left on. Nevertheless, the numbers don't lie, even if the persons eyes are accommodating.
I wish the display was brighter and glass had a more effective oleophobic coating. My first request could eliminate much of my 2nd request. That?s only real issue with it I have. Higher resolution would be nice, but I don?t expect nor will I feel Apple personally attacked me if it?s not updated.
Apple has several new LED backlight patents. They look very good. When they will be used, I have no idea.
The evidence to which I refer are the 1024x768 shutter and camera images found iOS for iPad v4.3b1. Images that would make no sense to include unless it's software misdirection or they plan to release to release new iPads with cameras and multiple display resolutions. To me, both sound un-Apple-like.
I?m much more inclined to believe some visual evidence than a rumour of an undefined ?retina display? and some other very crazy things.
Who knows? I've seen these little touches in unreleased Apple OS's before that ended up meaning nothing. It could also be an error. I've seen that too.
Comments
But if they DO bump up the res, I predict they’ll still maintain 1024x768 on the lowest model(s) to keep the entry cost low, and to relieve pressure on makers of the higher-res new display. (Maybe they’ll keep selling the iPad 1 as a low-end model, the way they still sell the iPhone 3GS.)
The AMOLED situation will hurt Apple somewhat. Not a lot, but it will have an impact.
You make an interesting point that a company that only sells a few devices can incorporate new components that aren’t yet widely available. However, by definition, without large-scale mass production, such components won’t impact the market as much, nor build up a large user base.
AMOLED’s nice in total darkness. So is the current iPad (not AS nice with the blacks, but still nice)... but an even better iPad display is likely coming soon. Meanwhile, in many other ways, for many other situations, AMOLED is inferior. ALMOED won’t affect iPad sales nor customer satisfaction significantly.
The best quality display now, in the widest range of usage scenarios, with the longest device life, is enhanced IPS LCD (not the original IPS) with an LED backlight, and high resolution. That’s what Apple offers.
Based on new evidence the iPad’s display resolution will not be updated for the iPad 2.
Because hidden camera icons found in 4.3 beta are at the same old res? I thought the same thing when I read that.
Now, Apple could just be smart enough not to bundle the high-res assets and give too much away, so there’s still SOME hope. A little. But higher-res 10” panels just sound cost-prohibitive to me. I’d love to be wrong, but it feels like wishful thinking.
I kind of expect Apple to stick with 1024x768 for cost and availability reasons, giving the iPad 2 some color/contrast improvements but nothing close to a “retina display.”
But if they DO bump up the res, I predict they’ll still maintain 1024x768 on the lowest model(s) to keep the entry cost low, and to relieve pressure on makers of the higher-res new display. (Maybe they’ll keep selling the iPad 1 as a low-end model, the way they still sell the iPhone 3GS.)
1) I have a feeling the lowest capacity cellular models will be dropped along with the highest capacity WiFi model as these seem to be the weakest sellers. This will mean 2xWiFi-only, 2xWiFi+GSM/UMTS, and 2xWiFi=CDMA/EVDO. That’s still 6 total models just like they have now.
2) I think the display could get a brighter yet more power efficient backlight and the display components melded together like the iPhone 4’s display making it look better and making it thinner. IOW, it will be improved,even if the resolution stays the same.
3) The iPad is a Retina Display, you just have to hold it more than 26” away from your eyes.
Because hidden camera icons found in 4.3 beta are at the same old res? I thought the same thing when I read that.
Now, Apple could just be smart enough not to bundle the high-res assets and give too much away, so there’s still SOME hope. A little. But higher-res 10” panels just sound cost-prohibitive to me. I’d love to be wrong, but it feels like wishful thinking.
Yeah, I thought about that, too, but Apple hasn’t tried to be that clever in the past. Weren’t there icons and pointers to the 960x640 display in iOS 4.0 betas?
No, they're not bright at all. In fact, even the best of them are dim when compared to a good Backlit LCD, and I'm really tired of reading how bright they are. Even the latest generation of AMOLEDs from Samsung are much dimmer than the iPhone 4 screen.
So you conclude, probably from reading a datasheet of an old product. But I have a prototype in front of me, and it is MUCH brighter than my iPhone LCD is. I can control the brightness through linux, 0-255. It is painful to the eyes, literally, when the brightness is above 100.
Isn’t that a straw man argument since LCD’s require a backlight or are you saying that OLEDs are brighter than LED backlights? Anecdotally, the iPhone 4’s LED backlight beats any AMOLED device I’ve compared it to.
OLEDs are still probably one generation away from being good enough for devices like the iPhone/iPad, but the brightness issue has clearly been solved in the newest gen. As far as the backlight, you could increase the power of the backlight, but then you are draining power. OLEDs only use power where they are being illuminated. LCDs operate on the principle of blocking the backlight.
The Taiwanese industry publication reported in December that constrained supplies of AMOLED screens would keep the display from Apple's next-generation iPad. The Cupertino, Calif., company will reportedly stick with an LCD screen for the second-generation tablet.
Well, you know what this means--AMOLED for iPad 2.
Sounds like lots of wasted components.
Which will probably drive the price of the remaining inventory higher as component manufacturers will attempt to offset losses.
Again, second and third tier buyers are screwed. They will buy the smaller lots at higher prices on the spot market, then make smaller margins.
Apple walks away with the lion's share of the industry profits.
... apple and SJ have worked their contracts and volumes-best price, best volumes best delivery date. SJ is fleet of foot, and we know who will win the race. ...
Agree. Apple has already cornered the flash memory market. They are the largest consumer of flash memory in the world, and thus get the lowest per-unit prices. Other manufacturers are forced to out-bid each other for the rest of the available supply, which hurts their margins.
Apple has also avoided paying off-the-shelf prices for their A4 chips, since they use their own custom design. That has probably cooled off the Intel relationship a bit. Remember when Apple used to get new Intel CPUs first? Not any more. (And, as an aside, even Microsoft has announced that Windows 8 will be ported to ARM. Two whole years from now at the earliest.)
Now Apple is working hard to get the best deals on touchscreen displays. Considering that iPad has about 96% of the pad computing market at the moment, it looks like Apple can get those deals.
As for AMOLED, let's remember that Apple doesn't blindly adopt the latest technology. Yes, Apple's industrial design is cutting edge, and yes, Steve can be eager use new technology. But only if it's mature enough to mass-produce, and only if it suits Apple's long-term goals.
Apple never directly supported Blu-Ray and never will. Plastic discs don't help Apple rent or sell videos on iTunes, so Blu-Ray gets thrown down the useless technology staircase. AMOLED screens just aren't quite good enough yet in color accuracy, brightness, and still cost too much. But when those problems are solved I'm sure Apple will join the party. AMOLED-based touchscreens can and will help Apple make even thinner iDevices. And Apple will be able to leverage their mass-purchasing power to get the best deals. All over again.
So you conclude, probably from reading a datasheet of an old product. But I have a prototype in front of me, and it is MUCH brighter than my iPhone LCD is. I can control the brightness through linux, 0-255. It is painful to the eyes, literally, when the brightness is above 100.
Have they solved the OLED degradation factor yet. iPhones remain some of the most long lasting devices in the market. We can probably expect the same from the iPad. If the screen is going to appreciably degrade before its average life expectancy, that might reflect badly on Apple's top quality reputation.
OLED screens "pop" and appear vividly coloured to the average person, and that sells. They also have ridiculously great contrast and probably would work well in the average television set sold at WalMart.
Amoled screens remind me of the flouro on black velvet pictures of Elvis you could buy in the seventies, no doubt they appeal to the same people why buy "art" at Walmart.
>insert sad clown emoticon here<
That may be true for the decades before but not anymore; today I'd would not say Apple make the best displays per picture quality or color accuracy.
Colour accuracy and Amoled could not possibly belong in the same sentence, garish, overly bright reds put paid to that.
Based on new evidence the iPad?s display resolution will not be updated for the iPad 2.
Just curious - Does anyone hereabouts have any real objection or hardship with the current iPad display? I have played extensively with a friend's iPad and to these 68-year-old eyes, the screen looks great. I haven't noticed any eye fatigue or other vision issues, but of course, everyone's different.
Just curious - Does anyone hereabouts have any real objection or hardship with the current iPad display? I have played extensively with a friend's iPad and to these 68-year-old eyes, the screen looks great. I haven't noticed any eye fatigue or other vision issues, but of course, everyone's different.
I wish the display was brighter and glass had a more effective oleophobic coating. My first request could eliminate much of my 2nd request. That?s only real issue with it I have. Higher resolution would be nice, but I don?t expect nor will I feel Apple personally attacked me if it?s not updated.
Based on new evidence the iPad?s display resolution will not be updated for the iPad 2.
Who knows? A new report today said that it would be. Me? I'm not going to speculate or worry about it. We've got less than two months to go before it's here, and less than that before Jobs tells us what it's got.
Who knows? A new report today said that it would be. Me? I'm not going to speculate or worry about it. We've got less than two months to go before it's here, and less than that before Jobs tells us what it's got.
The evidence to which I refer are the 1024x768 shutter and camera images found iOS for iPad v4.3b1. Images that would make no sense to include unless it's software misdirection or they plan to release to release new iPads with cameras and multiple display resolutions. To me, both sound un-Apple-like.
I’m much more inclined to believe some visual evidence than a rumour of an undefined “retina display” and some other very crazy things.
So you conclude, probably from reading a datasheet of an old product. But I have a prototype in front of me, and it is MUCH brighter than my iPhone LCD is. I can control the brightness through linux, 0-255. It is painful to the eyes, literally, when the brightness is above 100.
From handling the latest Samsung, and also reading the test reports and comparisons of the se new models with other models out. I haven' yet seen what I'd call a bright AMOLED. A lot of people are fooled by the dark black. The whites seem to "pop". But it still isn't very bright.
OLEDs are still probably one generation away from being good enough for devices like the iPhone/iPad, but the brightness issue has clearly been solved in the newest gen. As far as the backlight, you could increase the power of the backlight, but then you are draining power. OLEDs only use power where they are being illuminated. LCDs operate on the principle of blocking the backlight.
We really can't talk about prototypes. I've got lots of prototypes here. Some are better than others. I have a small Kodak panel that's VERY bright. But the lifetime is too short. Until they're IN a product, they don't matter. What we must talk about is what exists. And from what I see, so far, none of the phones that are out with AMOLEDS are all that bright.
Even in the test report I'm linking to, the photo's of the phones are useless. They are obviously not in a situation where brightness can be used as a comparison, as they're indoors, and auto brightness is being left on. Nevertheless, the numbers don't lie, even if the persons eyes are accommodating.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4126/nokia-n8-review-/4
I wish the display was brighter and glass had a more effective oleophobic coating. My first request could eliminate much of my 2nd request. That?s only real issue with it I have. Higher resolution would be nice, but I don?t expect nor will I feel Apple personally attacked me if it?s not updated.
Apple has several new LED backlight patents. They look very good. When they will be used, I have no idea.
The evidence to which I refer are the 1024x768 shutter and camera images found iOS for iPad v4.3b1. Images that would make no sense to include unless it's software misdirection or they plan to release to release new iPads with cameras and multiple display resolutions. To me, both sound un-Apple-like.
I?m much more inclined to believe some visual evidence than a rumour of an undefined ?retina display? and some other very crazy things.
Who knows? I've seen these little touches in unreleased Apple OS's before that ended up meaning nothing. It could also be an error. I've seen that too.