Could be an interesting day today. Apple expected to launch the iPad Mini. Does apple have a trick up there sleeve? Will it be more Nexus 7(tablet) or Samsung Note(phone)? Or none of the above. News should be out soon!
A bigger iPhone? iPad Mini
- Thread starter techjunkie26
- Start date
A bigger iPhone? iPad Mini
- Thread starter techjunkie26
- Start date
I don't get it Skull? The iPad3 has a retina display as does the 15" MBP... ???
Exactly, and the MacBook Pro, 15" Retina display. They can make it in any size.
http://www.webkomet.com/tech/macbook-pro-29
Last edited:
Remember how Apple defines Retina Display? To paraphrase "The ability to not distinguish the pixels at X distance from the eyes". Since they say the iPhone is to be used, if memory serves, at 10" from the eyes they have stated that requires 326 PPI (Pixel Per Inch). So lets do some math.
The Samsung note uses a 5.5" display. It is a 16x9 aspect ratio phone (iPhone 5 now matches that so Apple finally has set that precedent). So to get 5.5" diagonal measurement you need a 5" x 3" display. With 326 PPI that means the display resolution would have to be 1630 x 978. That doesn't fit any of the current 3 resolutions nor does it scale easily against any existing resolutions.
Heck the only reason the iPhone 5 has a 4" display, in my opinion, is so that it finally has the same number of apps displayed as the iPad. IE you can setup both devices to be identical for App Folder count and app placements per page. Maybe you can make a case for 16x9. But dang did Apple wait a long time to do that.
anjali189
New Member
Well, since I still have my old iPod Touch (yes, the "retro" version) I think I'll just stick with that, thanks 
Well...looks like it's just a shrunk down version. 100 million ipads is pretty amazing! Personally i still prefer a computer with a keyboard as a primary device.
Well, I'm always very interested to hear your opinions Skull, even if I don't always agree with them
I'm fine with the "math", but it presumes that the formula is set (particularly PPI), which I don't think I agree with. "Retina" is, at the end of the day, nothing more than a marketing gimmick, albeit an extremely successful one for Apple. Yes, they've set several precedents, but that doesn't mean they won't change the parameters in the future, particularly in the post-Jobs era. No standard demands that a device must be "retina" before it can be manufactured or sold, and so the definition of retina is entirely Apple's to modify as they please.
The MBP's of which we have a new retina model since our conversation started, do not have identical PPI (220 vs 227), although it is probably worth mentioning that the proper definition of a retina screen is by measuring Pixels Per Degree (PPD). There certainly seems to be a little latitude in changing the parameters to make the product in a range "fit".
Whilst I would totally agree that we are unlikely to see a 5.5" iPhone anytime soon, I don't think it's anything to do with the math related to retina screens and a fixed 326 PPI calculation. If Apple do decide that a new form factor such as 5.5" (or any other for that matter) is more compelling, I'm quite sure they will "tweak" the rule book and deliver a device, rather than preclude it from consideration because the math of a 326 PPI screen with a sensibly proportioned resolution simply doesn't work
Good business practice and shareholder responsibilities trump science in this one I think And they can always tell us "you are holding it too close", and with a larger device I wouldn't put that past them! 
Also, not sure I can agree with your opinion on the iP5 4" screen being related to the layout of the springboard!. iPad's have a rotatable springboard, unlike iPhones, so stock layouts can be 4x5 or 5x4 depending on your preference for holding the tablet. And of course the dock can hold many more apps than the 4 limit on the iPhone, so they still don't "match". Sure, in general terms I can make my iPad held in portrait look quite like my iPhone5, but the docks are quite different and the apps are not standard across both devices, so it's more like making some shared bits look broadly similar... I don't think I can agree that this was the only (or even a primary) reason to make the 4" iPhone5 display! I prefer to believe their marketing hype about it being the ideal size for my thumb
Anyhoo, always good to shoot the breeze!
xrayeyes
Well-Known Member
I was hoping the mini would have retinal display. I looked at the ipad 2 and 3 side by side, and the difference was very noticeable. Not having the RD and priced over $300 has turned me away for now. I want an ereader and was going to go for the mini, but I think I'll just get the new Kindle for now. The Kindle is cheap enough that I won't feel guilty if I sell it off or give it away a few years from now if the mini improves.
Well, I'm always very interested to hear your opinions Skull, even if I don't always agree with them
You are kinder than my wife. She doesn't agree nor does she want to hear them
You and I are of very similar minds on that subject. Especially since Apple stated that you have to be above 300 PPI to be a Retina Display in the very early iPhone 4 days.
And distance is the key factor they added to make that argument work. Gotta love the ability to make the data fit to support your argument.
Whilst I would totally agree that we are unlikely to see a 5.5" iPhone anytime soon, I don't think it's anything to do with the math related to retina screens and a fixed 326 PPI calculation. If Apple do decide that a new form factor such as 5.5" (or any other for that matter) is more compelling, I'm quite sure they will "tweak" the rule book and deliver a device, rather than preclude it from consideration because the math of a 326 PPI screen with a sensibly proportioned resolution simply doesn't work
Agreed. My original hope for the iPhone 5 was to actually drop the PPI to 300 and go with a 4" display so as to avoid the issues Android has had since day one. Multiple resolutions for the developer to deal with. Sadly the iPhone 5 is the first step in going down that ugly path.
Also, not sure I can agree with your opinion on the iP5 4" screen being related to the layout of the springboard!. iPad's have a rotatable springboard, unlike iPhones, so stock layouts can be 4x5 or 5x4 depending on your preference for holding the tablet. And of course the dock can hold many more apps than the 4 limit on the iPhone, so they still don't "match". Sure, in general terms I can make my iPad held in portrait look quite like my iPhone5, but the docks are quite different and the apps are not standard across both devices, so it's more like making some shared bits look broadly similar... I don't think I can agree that this was the only (or even a primary) reason to make the 4" iPhone5 display! I prefer to believe their marketing hype about it being the ideal size for my thumb
Anyhoo, always good to shoot the breeze!
True, the non-rotating nature of the iPhone 5 springboard is still an interesting design choice in my opinion. But personally I can't see why a resolution change was needed if they were only trying to deal with 16x9. No other iOS device has that ratio. What would be the point? They have shown they are committed to the original iPad ratio with the iPad Mini and iPad 4 so I don't think we will see an iPad 5 with 16x9. The iPhone 5 is now the ugly step child with only similarity being springboard layout to its bigger siblings. Plus Apple really stuck their foot in their mouth with the "We kept the screen narrow so you can use it with one hand". Hate to tell them, I have huge hands and I don't like stretching my thumb to reach the top of the 5's display. I actually avoid it by shifting the phone in my hand first.
But what do I know? I am just an old guy with too much time on my hands
mdmcatee
New Member
I hardly doubt this is the case. Plenty of folks are buying them,they have the form factor and the good hardware inside to work fine for what they are.
Obsolete the day you buy it...I don't really think so...I think they will be useful for some time to come.
Mac
Similar threads
