[MezSonus]

another article by a apple troll tryiing to convince himself that his upgraded ipad was worth it for a few extra pixels, LOL [censored] knob

[CaniblCat]

markverheul, on 01 April 2012 - 07:45 PM, said:

nonseq, on 01 April 2012 - 12:02 PM, said:

Hmmm Samsung may manufacture the screen but they didn't design or engineer it. I find it funny when folks think that having an manufacturing facility automatically makes the manufacturer the owner or source of vision/design/engineering of a component or device.

Ok, I don't see the source of your amusement. Maybe you're not aware of the innovation that goes into creating high quality manufacturing facilities. Talking about the screen, Apple doesn't own the patent(s) for it. Neither does Samsung, but the challenge is to use an idea on paper and mass-produce it. The technology Samsung employs to do that is light-years ahead of its competition (Sharp and LG were unable to meet the specs).
I can go on and say that the real innovators behind the Apple toys are the people who design and manufacture the chips and devices that run the device - Broadcom, samsung, qualcomm etc. Anyone can slap a couple of ARM cores together and call it a processor, but its up to the manufacturer to meet the stringent power and performance targets.

When a company (virtually any company) asks for a product, they give the manufacturer a set of specs (in the case of the iPad 3, lets say "we want a 9.7" 4:3 2048x1536 display. Can you make that for us? How much will it cost per unit?"
Then it's up to the manufacturer, in the case of the iPad screen, Samsung, to actually manufacture a device that meets the first company, in this case Apple's, criteria.

[CaniblCat]

waldojim, on 01 April 2012 - 06:03 PM, said:

GrahamSteffaniak, on 01 April 2012 - 02:33 PM, said:

Anything over 1080p resolution is not only useless at this point in time, but also more harmful than good.

-It takes more GPU usage to do the same tasks
-It degrades the quality of anything (which is nearly everything at this point) that has a resolution under the ipad's. photos are about the only good thing.
-It becomes a major headache for developers.

Im praying android doesnt follow apple on this one.

Should I assume you smoke crack? It sure sounds that way? How does it degrade the quality exactly? This I would like to know.

It degrades battery life, requiring a larger battery to keep up with the GPU's demands, and it generates more heat doing so, which, during graphics intensive tasks, slows the CPU down a bit, but overall, during non-graphics intensive tasks (such as web browsing, reading documents, etc), there should be no significant change.

[BhattathiriMulavana]

Innovative technology

[adithyathaduri4mg0]

Is it PCWorld or IWorld?

[waldojim]

CaniblCat, on 02 April 2012 - 12:29 AM, said:

waldojim, on 01 April 2012 - 06:03 PM, said:

GrahamSteffaniak, on 01 April 2012 - 02:33 PM, said:

Anything over 1080p resolution is not only useless at this point in time, but also more harmful than good.

-It takes more GPU usage to do the same tasks
-It degrades the quality of anything (which is nearly everything at this point) that has a resolution under the ipad's. photos are about the only good thing.
-It becomes a major headache for developers.

Im praying android doesnt follow apple on this one.

Should I assume you smoke crack? It sure sounds that way? How does it degrade the quality exactly? This I would like to know.

It degrades battery life, requiring a larger battery to keep up with the GPU's demands, and it generates more heat doing so, which, during graphics intensive tasks, slows the CPU down a bit, but overall, during non-graphics intensive tasks (such as web browsing, reading documents, etc), there should be no significant change.

In other words, Apple already compensated for the only significant problem, the battery and gpu. So where is the video quality degradation again?

[jscott418]

If you bought a Android tablet. You could not have wanted a iPad in the first place. Not sure if a retina display changes that. Not everyone worships Apple.

[jscott418]

MrSatyre, on 01 April 2012 - 11:53 AM, said:

Retina display is utterly useless. This is just one more sad example of marketing hype and the lemmings that live for it. And the sad thing is, everyone who actually designs and manufactures FPDs knows it. Apple's supplier could have accomplished better results than the so-called Retina Display by improving sub-pixel processing, among others, for a fraction of the cost, all without increasing the resolution. People, it's 9/7"! You can't see the difference in resolution just because they tell you you can!

I totally agree, waste of graphic processing power. Do this idiots not realize that if Apple had kept the same resolution as the iPad 2 and still updated the graphics to a quad it would
really be a fast Tablet?

[rastrohman]

Buy a Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1. We did a side by side comparison with the new iPad and could not see a difference.

[KLanD]

It really isn't that big a difference.

[KLanD]

nonseq, on 01 April 2012 - 12:02 PM, said:

haxxorking, on 01 April 2012 - 11:56 AM, said:

I see people in stores comparing iPads (2 and "new") by looking at the screen from like 10cm and trying to see if the icons rounded corners are smooth or jagged. Other than that they can't tell them apart.
So, yea the Retina display is pretty much the only new cool thing on the new iPad. And I find it ironic that of all companies out there, it's Apples' arch nemesis (and Android friend) Samsung that manufactures this "magical" screen. (Sharp and LG will eventually too).
I'm not sure what the max supported res is in Android atm but you can be sure that sammy will eventually manufacture an even better screen for use in it's own tablets. Some rumors say 11,6" tablet would have a 2560x1600 res screen (and run Jelly beans?).
Anyhoo, "retina" is a relative term in a way. If you hold your iPad2 and "New iPad" at an arms length, can you easily tell them apart? Let's not hysterical over the 300dpi hype just yet. It's good that Apple drives the manufacturing in that direction, but we've been doing just fine without so far, I think we can wait a few more moths for the others to get their products out...

Hmmm Samsung may manufacture the screen but they didn't design or engineer it. I find it funny when folks think that having an manufacturing facility automatically makes the manufacturer the owner or source of vision/design/engineering of a component or device.

You don't think Apple designed and developed the screen do you?

[crosswordbob]

KLanD, on 02 April 2012 - 06:51 AM, said:

It really isn't that big a difference.

I couldn't disagree more.

[crosswordbob]

MezSonus, on 01 April 2012 - 10:50 PM, said:

another article by a apple troll tryiing to convince himself that his upgraded ipad was worth it for a few extra pixels, LOL [censored] knob

Um... nope—an article by someone who didn't previously own an iPad, and still doesn't. Do pay attention.

[crosswordbob]

jscott418, on 02 April 2012 - 02:06 AM, said:

MrSatyre, on 01 April 2012 - 11:53 AM, said:

Retina display is utterly useless. This is just one more sad example of marketing hype and the lemmings that live for it. And the sad thing is, everyone who actually designs and manufactures FPDs knows it. Apple's supplier could have accomplished better results than the so-called Retina Display by improving sub-pixel processing, among others, for a fraction of the cost, all without increasing the resolution. People, it's 9/7"! You can't see the difference in resolution just because they tell you you can!

I totally agree, waste of graphic processing power. Do this idiots not realize that if Apple had kept the same resolution as the iPad 2 and still updated the graphics to a quad it would
really be a fast Tablet?

It is a really fast tablet. And has a lovely display.

[crosswordbob]

rastrohman, on 02 April 2012 - 02:32 AM, said:

Buy a Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1. We did a side by side comparison with the new iPad and could not see a difference.

Were your eyes open?

[crosswordbob]

It'sreally quite pathetic watching people try to belittle technological advance just because it has an apple on it. They've basicaly turned into that which they've long bemoaned—blinded by a logo.

[KLanD]

crosswordbob, on 02 April 2012 - 06:54 AM, said:

KLanD, on 02 April 2012 - 06:51 AM, said:

It really isn't that big a difference.

I couldn't disagree more.

I haven't done any rigorous testing, but side by side most of the standard apps look pretty much the same. Maybe I hold my tablets farther from my face than other do? I mean, if I put them about a foot from my face I can see a big difference in some text, but @ 2 feet+ there really isn't that much difference. If they used more vector graphics, the difference would probably be bigger.

I'm not saying it's not a great screen, it's just not SOOO great as to make me either switch or upgrade. If I owned (the tabs I have are loaners and office tabs) the ipad2 I really wouldn't see any reason to upgrade.

[AnonymousPC]

crosswordbob, on 02 April 2012 - 07:03 AM, said:

It'sreally quite pathetic watching people try to belittle technological advance just because it has an apple on it. They've basicaly turned into that which they've long bemoaned—blinded by a logo.

It is honestly not that significant of a technological advance... You have four times the pixels for slighlty less than twice the graphics performance (All apple did was was double the amount of gpu cores, so the increase in performance is about twice). And it is not like Apple was first to create such a high res screen (Although they are the first to get it widely accepted because of their popularity).

[andrys]

rastrohman, on 02 April 2012 - 02:32 AM, said:

Buy a Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1. We did a side by side comparison with the new iPad and could not see a difference.

Who's "We" ? An online site with testing area? I have a Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and thought last night (again) that it's really beautiful and wondered how much better the new Retina display on the iPad 3 looks against that. Samsung is not using Super Amoled on the 10.1, which isn't great for text anyway, so I wonder how they do that.

[Nuke61]

KLanD, on 02 April 2012 - 07:11 AM, said:

I haven't done any rigorous testing, but side by side most of the standard apps look pretty much the same. Maybe I hold my tablets farther from my face than other do? I mean, if I put them about a foot from my face I can see a big difference in some text, but @ 2 feet+ there really isn't that much difference. If they used more vector graphics, the difference would probably be bigger.

That might be the difference right there. I hold the iPad at right around 1 foot from my face, and even when it's on my lap it's only 1.5' away.

Quote

I'm not saying it's not a great screen, it's just not SOOO great as to make me either switch or upgrade. If I owned (the tabs I have are loaners and office tabs) the ipad2 I really wouldn't see any reason to upgrade.

If I owned an iPad 2, I don't think I would have upgraded either, but the author is talking about comparing it with his Android tablet. Apps factor into the impression too, because he's seeing how quickly the iOS devs upgrade their apps, while Android tablet apps seem to often to be a case of good enough. On one hand, Android phone apps look much better on a tablet than iPhone apps look on the iPad. The flip side is that there is far less incentive for tablet specific Android apps.