| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| Dispelling the 'Retina' myth |
| By Thom Holwerda on 2012-08-11 14:31:12 |
| "I decided to write this post after having too many heated discussions with many users across many blogs. After hearing repeatedly; 'The iPad will have a better display' or 'It sucks because it's not Retina' I figured it was time to break the argument down and dispel the 'Retina' myth." Fantastic post at The Verge. |
|
| The world... |
| By thavith_osn on 2012-08-11 22:52:34 |
|
...will move to Retina whether we like it or not. The sooner the better as the prices for the screens will drop to the current non Retina levels. Apple has started the ball rolling, and it will only pick up speed from here. If Samsung had Retina first, I can guarantee the arguments would be something along the lines, Apple is falling behind, Retina is an important technology etc. etc. etc. Just so you know, I don't care either way. I have an iPhone 4 and I don't love it any more than my 3G I had earlier. |
 - Score: 2 |
| RE[2]: I understand the argument, but its messed up. |
| By Anonymous Penguin on 2012-08-11 23:09:46 |
|
I had an iPad2 and I sold it because I had very little use for it, other than playing some simple games. As others have said, I normally need a full keyboard, a mouse and a separate screen. I bought a "top" netbook, but that was a mistake as well: CPU too slow and screen too small and low quality. I want to buy an ultrabook in the near future. |
| - Score: 2 |
| Some People Just Want To Watch Apple Burn |
| By tony on 2012-08-12 02:27:28 |
|
That article is full of sour grapes, picking and choosing on stats to be overly pedantic. Trying to disprove the obvious (that new iPad screens/MacBookProR screens look amazing). And yes, some of it is the color, but a lot of it is the DPI. We had the same anti-Apple hysteria when the Retina display came out for the iPhone 4, about how it's a gimmick, how it doesn't make any difference. Then Android phones started showing up with similar DPI displays, and that debate suddenly went away. Higher PPI displays are coming, and not just for Apple. Apple is the first to get the ball rolling on making it a consumer standard (which yes, of course there have been high DPI displays before, but rare and/or expensive). Is the Surface's 1080p display enough to sate my desire for high DPI? I'll have to see. It could be. But either way, mainstream DPI is coming, and that's a good thing. It look gorgeous (and looking gorgeous doesn't require having an Apple logo on the case) and the biggest benefit is that it makes things easier to read. Text just looks better with higher DPI. TL;DR: Hey Verge, u mad? |
| - Score: 1 |
| Don't underestimate the human vison system |
| By izomiac on 2012-08-12 02:28:05 |
|
I'm fairly amused at how it's taken for a given that the "retina" screen is the best the eye can see. Our photoceptors can detect a single photon. There are ~25,000 cone cells (color) per eye in the fovea, which sees about four square inches at arm's length. So 12,500 cone cells per inch at a couple feet, plus some rods as well. Obviously, that's not the resolution we see at. Our visual system heavily compresses information in an analog system, then our brain reconstitutes it. Given the overlap, we do a fair bit of superresolution processing while we're at it, so individual photons aren't the lower limit. Apple's own research points to about 450 pixels-per-inch that a normal person can see at two feet. If you're nearsighted then you can distinguish more. If you're very nearsighted, then a lot more. Does it matter? Probably only with text, where printers and book publishers have long noticed this problem and increased DPI to ridiculous levels (perhaps infinite, as nearby ink dots merge). And, then there's the issue with color. Many men only can see two types of color (r-g & b), while some women can see four (r, g, g, b). The exact response to light at each wavelength also differs based on genetics. I remember in my high school chemistry class one classmate could see "red" well past 900 nm, while others could barely see it at 700 nm. I think moving beyond RGB color would be cool, but I doubt most people would notice. |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE[2]: Comment by kaiwai |
| By kaiwai on 2012-08-12 02:34:52 |
|
> What do you expect from the frothing at the mouth Apple fanbois? Must.... buy... more... Apple... stuff. Reminds me very much of a product being launched by Apple and there was a reporter who was talking to customers waiting in line for it. In that line you saw a variety of responses but what I thought took the cake was the response by a lady who said, "I don't know what it is or what it does but it is from Apple so it must be incredible" (to paraphrase her). I don't know whether it says more about society in general or the Apple fanbase in general because at least from where I stand what I see is the Microsoft fanbase critical of Microsoft when they screw up but when it comes to the Apple fanbase what you year is a litany of "hold on' and 'it'll be fixed soon' and 'it's only a x.0 release so give it time' but funny how these same people never gave Microsoft the time to release a service pack. Edited 2012-08-12 02:39 UTC |
| - Score: 8 |
| by age 45 |
| By unclefester on 2012-08-12 06:10:52 |
| By age 45 most of us would be unable to tell the difference between a Retina display and 640x480 display without wearing spectacles. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE: by age 45 |
| By Neolander on 2012-08-12 08:03:55 |
| I'm pretty sure I have read somewhere that 10 to 20% of people can't tell the difference between a regular screen and stereoscopic 3D, and this has yet to prevent companies from trying to sell that expensive tech :) |
| - Score: 1 |
| Comment by kovacm |
| By kovacm on 2012-08-12 10:51:48 |
|
Lol! It is impresive how much energy and time people waste to prove that Apple is wrong in something, or that there are better solutions ... Bravo for Surface Pro but calling article "Dispelling the 'Retina' myth" is pure nonsense. Anyway: go, go Thom with "dispelling" Apple succes! :D |
| - Score: -1 |
| There was myth? |
| By siraf72 on 2012-08-12 13:51:47 |
| Retina Display was just marketing jargon for "good screen". That's all it ever was. Everyone please calm down. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE: Some People Just Want To Watch Apple Burn |
| By _txf_ on 2012-08-12 14:25:21 |
|
> That article is full of sour grapes, picking and choosing on stats to be overly pedantic. Trying to disprove the obvious (that new iPad screens/MacBookProR screens look amazing). And yes, some of it is the color, but a lot of it is the DPI. Hardly. The author does not dispute the fact tha the retina displays aren't good, just superfluous. If you had actually read the article the author posits that the retina displays benefit more from the better contrast and color gamut, more than the 400% more pixels. What's more the iPad 3 has 70% more battery capacity than the ipad2 but has 10~20% less battery life. If apple hadn't gotten lazy by not making a proper scalable UI then they could have easily gone 1080p. Instead they're adding invisible pixels at a massive battery life cost. Edited 2012-08-12 14:28 UTC |
| - Score: 4 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |