The iPad 3 would make me so horny...
In my Dad's generation, middle-aged men of means would buy new cars at the end of every July because that's when new licence plates came out. Their old cars would be traded in as part-exchange, sold to third parties through classified ads, or passed magnanimously to relatives. This was regarded as civilised and financially …
This topic is closed for new posts.
a tablet without it is not worth having
That's a load of crap. The iPad2 screen is great... certainly I note not one jot of graininess compared to my PCs/laptops.
If you never owned a previous model you're not really in a place to make the comparison.
Re: a tablet without it is not worth having
"If you never owned a previous model you're not really in a place to make the comparison"
Yeah right. The fact that I have spent hours looking at the screen of previous iPads owned by various people including my girlfriend, is irrelevant. I really can't possible compare without having owned an iPad 2 for a year. Plus the fact that they have the two versions on sale side-by-side in the shops.
No I can't possibly make a comparison, and my opinion is invalid.
" certainly I note not one jot of graininess compared to my PCs/laptops."
Yes, but it's still visibly pixellated, unlike a Kindle, and unlike the new model. Maybe for playing angry birds it makes no difference.
I am glad you are happy with your iPad2. There is no deed to be a dick about it.
Re: a tablet without it is not worth having
Perhaps he looked at one of the previous models and decided not to buy it, just as I did. You know, kind of a try before you buy? Maybe he also, like me, had an iPhone 4 with an amazingly sharp little screen and thought to himself, why would I buy a 10 inch phone that can't be used as a phone and that has a screen barely better than the one in my existing phone? Apple will probably include a higher res screen in their next iPad update, I think I'll reassess my purchasing decision when they do.
Pretty simple, and logical, thought process.
August!
The new registration letters were issued in August. People bought cars at the end of July because the "old" registration letter was worth less than the "new" one would be a few days later and the cars were therefore cheaper. People buying every new iproduct at launch are like those who bought a car every August. The only value you get for the extra price is a moment's exclusivity.
Re: August!
The price usually does not change, so you get a more advanced and capable product for the same amount of money. Moores fucking law, it's been around for a while now...
Whinge... so Apple give you more for the same price and it's wrong. Of course higher res content is larger - but I'd rather have it - the same goes for downloading a HD movie off iTunes - yes it takes longer.
Did you even read the article? He clearly contends you get LESS for the same money... heavier, thicker, less battery life. And for graphically intensive apps, slower too.
Well, fine, since the iPad 2 is still on sale for less money, then the author could say that you get more for less money, which seems like it's also good.
If it looks cr@p maybe it's you? Try some vector graphics or better optimisation - what people used to do with minimal memory was amazing - ever wonder is some programmers / developers have got a bit lazy in comparison?
Crying about the extra size - can compare it to my digital camera - yes the first one I had did 2m pixels - the one I have now over 10m - so of course the file sizes are much, much larger - I wonder if canon would take my complaint seriously?
"Did you even read the article? He clearly contends you get LESS for the same money... heavier, thicker, less battery life."
You bothered to check the difference? The new iPad is just 0.6mm thicker and 50g heavier - but you get a bigger battery (or would you have preferred significantly less battery life), 4x resolution screen, better camera - all for the same price as the model it replaces.
More link bait...
Ooh - so brave, so counter-cultural: "I am going to speak an unspeakable truth."
Except so much of it isn't true. I, too, cleared put loads of apps and content when upgrading to the new iPad, expecting the larger photos and apps would take up way more room. And guess what? Yes, you lose a bit of space, but it's minimal (about 1gb). Hardly the apocalypse.
And then there's the dismissal of the obvious advantages of the new display in order to moan that his crappy workflow will have to be adapted. Boo hoo.
As always with these sorts of mock-contentious articles, the question should always be asked: "What would YOU have done"? What iPad was he expecting, which would have satisfied him? There wasn't one - he just wanted to write an article to counter all the "new iPad is a success" pieces, as so many other saddoes have done.
Re: More link bait...
The iPad has a nice screen but in every other changed aspect it is a failure. But only some iSheep can see that. It was a similar issue with iPhone4 and its faulty antenna. Had that been any other company then the iSheep would have ravaged and ruined them. iPocrites.
content producer?
Wow you earned money rasterizing PDFs and now you complain?
Do you call yourself a content producer professional?
Not sure what the ipad's biggest secret was, that it was so crappy that it couldn't render a PDF fast enough or that the content producers were overpaid 0-value-added PNG generators.
Re: content producer?
You sure as hell rasterized SOMETHING, which I think was his point.
Well, just stop publishing magazines
as image files, and start sending articles as text as all normal people do.
Oh goody! I've got my popcorn ready for this one.
'Cos there is nothing that steams Apple fanboys' piss more than one of 'the faithful' going public with apostate opinions like this.
Re: Oh goody! I've got my popcorn ready for this one.
You mean there is nothing that gets the apple hating faithful more excited than a pointless bit of link-bait on a Friday afternoon.
Actually, the fight is better than usual.
Seems all the Windows, Macintosh and Linux fans have settled their differences. They're joined forces to give a roasting to their common enemy - Wired - because of their braindead way of publishing issues as 250 megabyte of straight images.
It's ironic. I remember that Wired were one of the most technophillic magazines when I first encountered them. You'd expect them to jump in boots first into HTML5. Instead, they're perpetrating canonical "DO NOT DO THIS" behaviour of the WWW: representing text as images.
Buying cars every year...
...just as stupid as wasting wads of cash on the latest, soon-to-be-outdated Apple crap.
Oh, and they're number plates, not "license plates". We're not the 51st state yet.
Nicely cooked author photo, I thought
Wonder what he looks like when he's at home...
The author had just realised after 20 yrs or so that he is a complete idiot.
Sooner or later all the fanbois will come to this same conclusion.
Re: Wang N Staines
What a load of Tosh.
I've been using a Mac for the past 5 years.
The new job requires me to use Windows 7.
Windows just gets in your face at every opportunity. I've threatened to wipe W7 and install XP
Now I remember why I ditched my Windows Laptop and moved to a MacBook.
Even Ubuntu is better than Windows (I'm a dev who works with Fedora in my spare time)
I used to own an iPhone(provided by work). Now I have an Android (HTC Sensation). It is a POS. Admittedly, a lot of that is down to HTC and their mangling of Android. I'll be rooting it as soon as the warranty runs out and replacing it with something a whole lot better.
I know I'll get downvoted but here goes...
Re: Wang N Staines
So to summarise:
1. You use a Mac, and have an iphone
2. You prefer XP to Windows 7, but don't like your HTC Sensation.
3. You use fedora, BUT
4. you're commenting on an article that criticise the iPad 3 without mentioning it.
Did I miss anything (e.g. a critical review of the article or an intellectual argument in favour of the ipad 3)?
Re: Wang N Staines
He was responding to Wang N Staines you fucktard.
...fucktard?
About every tenth time it happens, I ask - why on earth are people so damn RUDE on the internet?
Why do people on forums routinely use the sort of language that would get them sacked if they used it at work, and smacked in the face if they used it down the pub?
It's possible to disagree with someone, or observe that they have missed a point, without resorting to abuse.
Re: ...fucktard?
Welcome to the internet. You must be new here?
Ha-ha-ha! LOL! ROFL!
1 - To have this kind of resolution on a screen the size of iPad is only useful to attract complete idiots in the first place. Like "HD" videos on iPhone. Maybe they should start selling these big water-filled lenses again to let the eyeBads "realise their full potential".
2 - Has anyone ever heard of anti-aliasing, down at Apple?
Re: Ha-ha-ha! LOL! ROFL!
Text and graphics in iOS have had sub-pixel rendering and antialiasing from day one, since that's a fundamental feature of OS X and they just ported the graphics libraries.
But antialiasing isn't some magic potion that makes resolution meaningless. How useful is a tablet or phone going to be if its screen is 10 DPI with antialiasing?
2048 x 1536
I'd love that on a 14" to 16" laptop. Or on 11.5" x 11.7" active area eBook so as to read US & European technical PDFs actual size.
I'd have thought that with 16M colours, and sub-pixel addressing that you only need 120dpi to 150dpi on any tablet.
The iPad3 is 9.7" so it's about 264 dpi which just a waste of power.
Un- Aliased B&W text needs to be 300dpi to 600dpi to look really sharp. 180dpi pure white or black looks jagged. But if you anti-alias then you can use 1/4 resolution, so 150dpi is nearly as good as 600dpi. Laser printers can't as they either put a dot or not. But eInk can do 16 shades (enough) and LCD/OLED about 256 shades.
So decently done 133dpi LCD can look like over 500dpi. Add subpixel addressing and you nearly double the effective quality.
264 dpi (the iPad3) needs nearly 4 times the TFT power as as 132dpi as it's four times as many dots.
Apple egotisim wining out over common sense.
Add visual acuity. Not all iPads are owned by teenagers. Over 80% of adults won't see improvement above 150dpi for anything shaded. Why do you think colour photo resolution on books and magazines is about 150dpi?
Then how many adults should be using "reading glasses" and are not:?
People seeing my 15" 1600 x1200 screen laptop are first:
Staggered by resolution.
Second
can't believe it's over 10 years old.
It's 133.3dpi and yes, sub pixel addressing works to make text look clear and smooth (though the default settings are not the best, but you can manually "tune" it).
I'll buy a tablet when it's eInk and 8.5" x 11.7" active area at more than 120dpi.
Most of the cheap 7" androids are opposite extreme to iPad3 with having a useless 800 x 480 resolution. My 4.3" Archos is 800 x 480. 16:9. It's too chunky for portable and too small/low res for eBook or Internet sensibly.
I think a 3:1 format might work for a phone for scrolling pages 1440 x 480 Like LG Chocolate shape,
But 4:3 is better than 16:9 for a larger Tablet. Apple do have that correct, though for large "eReader" that would give 11.7 x 8.775 (US letter size needs 8.5" and Eu A4 needs 11.67")
This
I had a 15" laptop with 1600x1200 in 2003, and it really annoys me that we are supposed to get all wet atbout 13xx x 1080 these days. Where are my 4K x 2K pixel laptops?
Re: 2048 x 1536
The iPad3 screen res does make sense for text. The text quality is excellent. And no anti-aliasing is not quite the same.
For those who claim it is, please provide evidence or proof. Otherwise all this academic commentary of how sub-pixel rendering *could* do this at lower dpi is pointless.
Arguing a feature against a different way of doing it is fine, but only if someone is actually doing it. If someone else was doing sub-pixel optimised rendering on a tablet, then fine you'd have a point. But no one is, especially given that Apple's competitors would love to do so.
If it were feasible, and economical Hell Apple would do it! This retina stuff could wait until it became a cheaper "gimmick" as you put it.
<joke> I'm only getting broadband when I get at least 10 Gbps. My ebook reader will be 64bit colour, reflective, 0.1ps response time with subpixel rendering and with 1PB of storage for all my holographic 3D videos and my laptop/smartphone one will have at least 2 years of battery life at max screen brightness, it will have a replaceable nuclear fusion battery. </joke>
Yeah you are not that far fetched, but one can always N years for some product definition that will fit what one wants, That's great but that does not make a certain product out today pointless.
Regarding storage, I think the idea is that everything is in the iCloud and not on the device to make sure that you stick with Apple.
As for the article itself, it is pretty sad and quite pointless. It reads of an Apple fanboi's mid-life crisis.
I think it is just wisdom of the years and rational thought becoming part of the buying equation.
Don't want one, don't buy one, end of.
Just stop whining about it!
Re: 2048 x 1536
@Mage - the things that take the extra power are the GPU and the LCD backlight (higher resolution screens have lower light transmission, so need more light from behind to give the same brightness), TFT switching is neither here nor there. See the Pixel QI screen for a prime example of this.
Sub-pixel anti-aliasing of fonts isn't a perfect solution, and needs more CPU power to achieve. The results aren't much better than fax quality (150 dpi, way short of the 500 you've pulled out of thin air), and there's a good reason that laser printers print text at 300+ dpi, pixels are much more obvious in high contrast B&W than colour photos.
Re: 2048 x 1536
We don't care what you think because we've seen and used high res screens for years. The one in the current iPad is fabulous, and obviously different/better to it's predecessor. Real world experience counts for a hell of a lot more than your made-up stats. Why not pop down to the shops and have a look at one so you can then fuck off back to whatever shithole you live in with a clue?
Where's the 'fuck off' icon?
4 pixels need 4x the power?
Don't be an idiot.
Do four tiny light bulbs need four times the power of one giant light bulb?
The only reason why the new iPad screen uses more power is because the circuitry for each pixel blocks more of the backlight, so the backlight has to be brighter to get the same amount of brightness to the user. Based on microscope photos of the two screens I calculate that the backlight needs to be about 50% brighter, not 300%.
Re: 2048 x 1536
BTW I don't know what "sub-pixel" antialiasing is unless you mean ClearType-style crap. iOS has had text antialiasing since version 1.
Re: 2048 x 1536
I'm inclined to agree with you and the author that the higher resolution of the Ipad 3 is overrated and the increased power draw is a problem. A problem that will probably be redressed in a release later this year, I guess. But there are several points worth noting: the higher resolution does make for better text rendering which is easier on the eye. The problem with the Ipad as reading device is that it is not suitable for use in bright sunshine - for reading you are much better off with a nice e-ink display.
The Ipad 2's resolution combined with the form factor was not particular good for watching films - a friend of mine who is a happy owner of an Ipad 2 showed me with pride that it does show videos in fullscreen, but only by cropping them. The same video on my Samsung Galaxy 8.9 is fullscreen with no cropping and crisper but pretty much the same physical size.
Apple would have needed to bump the pixel density of the next release by at least 25 % to keep up with the competition. Having started the whole "pixel density race" on the phones they needed to catch up on the tablet. But HD (1080p) is probably all you need for gorgeous media consumption but then again, the 16:10 or 16:9 is what's required.
It is fascinating how Apple manage to dictate the terms of the debate and convince people that whichever technical feature they have mastered is the reason for buying the device. A good screen is not just one with the highest resolution - colour gamut, contrast and viewing angles are equally important but, as we saw with digital cameras, more difficult to market. Personally, I'm sold on the OLED colour gamut and contrast values over notional resolution. But that is beside the point. As Mr Orlowski pointed out years ago: Apple has become the master of encouraging people to sell their devices to themselves: I-Tunes promised to make it easy to buy digital music (as long as you had an I-pod) and the app store promise to make it easy to buy apps, films and books (as long as you have an I-pad).
Apple, as the article's author notes at the end of his piece, probably has done it again with the I-pad 3 - people will buy them because of the screen but I think his criticism should be noted: it does feel a bit like Nokia's N95 - technically brilliant at the time but still flawed; the nimbus is still there if somewhat dimmer.
Re: 2048 x 1536
If you watch Apple's presentation about the new iPad, you will see that they DO advertise the new screen as having a wider color gamut, better contrast, etc. It's not all about the resolution, you just assume it is.
As for Apple steering the conversation re: which features people get excited about, that's just good marketing. Which do you prefer, Apple giving a semi-technical presentation about how great their new screen is, or Nokia paying a fortune to some pop star to put on a concert that is not related to Nokia, Microsoft, cell phones, or technology in any way?
For as much crap as Apple gets for being a poseur technology company selling shiny status symbols to fashionistas, they seem to be the only company who is actually trying to get people excited about technical things. How many "regular" people were excited about DPI and number of graphics cores before the new iPad...?
Me not horny, you sucky-sucky...
Oh, ha-haa, I geddit...
Latent racism and lazy sterotyping as edgy tech comment.
Twat.
Re: Me not horny, you sucky-sucky...
Someone hasn't see Full Metal Jacket...
Re: Me not horny, you sucky-sucky...
Yes, yes, I'm aware of the whole "$10 sucky-fucky, me love you long time" meme.
And?
Re: Me not horny, you sucky-sucky...
And you're being an uptight prick.
"inability to get my kitten videos off the effin' thing without wasting an evening transferring them to a place where I don't want them to go while being forced to compress them to a quality I don't want."
Well, at least they've kept the standard Apple user interface, then.
You know...
...that a USB lead comes free with the iPad, don't you?
You massive spaz.
Hmm
I can get photos or videos off my my iDevices the same way I get them off any digital camera. Literally. I plug it into a USB port on any computer, the device comes up as a digital camera (in Windows and OS X) and from there I can drag-and-drop. Don't know how anyone could possibly have a problem with that. And that's not counting all the other ways to get videos off of the devices, e.g., email.
on the other hand
there is no reason to go higher resolution than the IP3's, so it means that it is reasonably safe to develop for that.
The odds are that all the MacBookPro and Air screens will use the same (+/- widescreen) resolution, which will settle things down again, as this will become the main standard in the same way that 1024x768 has been for about 15 years.
You Idiot
You got Horny Horny and got Sucked and sucked and sucked. Took you 20 years to realise. How Applisitic .
Now do something worthwhile.
And go to moan in Cupertino. .And ask for a refund OR betterstill, start a class action suit with other fanbois for being sucky sucky.
"one of 'the faithful' "
You mean a stinkin' troll - I may as well say "I have been a loyal Android user for [insert long time] but now I have realised what a tw$t I was so bought an iPhone and now my life is complete".
This topic is closed for new posts.
