The dramatic improvement in resolution in the screen of the new iPad doesn't translate to significantly better-looking videos from iTunes, Netflix, or YouTube...
Aside from resolution, contrast, and color, other characteristics of the two iPad screens (off-angle viewing, handling of reflections, etc.) looked basically identical to my eyes. I wouldn't be surprised if instruments could detect more differences than I did, but I would if those differences could be called "major."
In summary, the new iPad's improved screen didn't improve the appearance of video I watched to the extent you might expect from Apple's specs. Yes, the new screen is better, but it doesn't provide nearly the same level of immediate, dramatic improvement for video as it does for text and graphics.
To do so, I think it needs better contrast ratio, which may require a shift in display technology to something like OLED. I'd also like to see a screen that handled reflections better, which would go a long way toward improving the appearance of dark scenes viewed in brighter environments.
Which sort of goes back to the point I was talking about before, this much resolution at this size screen is overkill and unnecessary. The added bitrate you need to add to compensate for the increased resolution will dramatically increase the size of movies and TV shows you have to download. If you continue to compress or use lower resolution video, you'll see more and more of these artifacts on the higher resolution screen. The fundamental flaws of LCD will always be there, and the next step in improving image quality is contrast, NOT resolution.
Which sort of goes back to the point I was talking about before, this much resolution at this size screen is overkill and unnecessary. The fundamental flaws of LCD will always be there, and the next step in improving image quality is contrast, NOT resolution.
Your argument is only valid if the SOLE purpose of an iPad is to play movies. Why ignore the rest of the article that says that there is a big improvement in images and text...which affects just about every other type of use for an iPad.
Your argument is only valid if the SOLE purpose of an iPad is to play movies. Why ignore the rest of the article that says that there is a big improvement in images and text...which affects just about every other type of use for an iPad.
The entire article is about movies/video.
And isn't the vast majority of the content being played on a tablet moving pictures? The new iPad still doesn't solve the single biggest problem with a backlit screen replacing all reading materials: eyestrain. Backlights are harsh on the eyes, and there's no way around that with the current screen. For pure reading, e-ink is still superior. And who benefits from the cleaner text? People who read at 6" from their faces. Most people who read at a reasonable distance (1.5"-ish) are too far for the eye to detect the difference.
Images look better IF they are higher resolution. Otherwise the iPad has to interpolate pixels, which still doesn't look much different, if better at all. The web isn't exactly filled to the brim with high resolution and fidelity images.
My entire soap box is this: we're moving devices into a space (high quality resolution) where there isn't necessary content to use the device appropriately (compressed photos, compressed videos, compressed audio). And with the advent of bandwidth caps (both cellular and home broadband), we're being squeezed even more.
Which sort of goes back to the point I was talking about before, this much resolution at this size screen is overkill and unnecessary. The added bitrate you need to add to compensate for the increased resolution will dramatically increase the size of movies and TV shows you have to download. If you continue to compress or use lower resolution video, you'll see more and more of these artifacts on the higher resolution screen. The fundamental flaws of LCD will always be there, and the next step in improving image quality is contrast, NOT resolution.
Well, obviously, videos from iTunes, Netflix and YouTube will not look significantly better, since they're far lower resolution than the display is. That's an issue with the services/apps, not the tablet. They're almost certainly not even delivering the highest resolution that they're capable of delivering, since, with no devices sporting such high resolution displays, there was no reason to make the mobile versions of apps/services support such resolutions. I'm sure that that will change in time.
Also, you worry about the size of video downloads, but the future of video isn't in downloads; it's in streaming. Netflix, YouTube, Amazon Video and so on are all streaming services that don't permanently store anything on the device. The only thing that it'll affect is the amount of data that you download, but no matter what that amount is, there will be data rates made available to customers to support it.
I really don't see why you have a problem with this resolution "overkill." If it's overkill when it comes to video, then it may not be (and isn't) with other uses, like text and photos. Even if it's overkill when it comes to everything, where's the harm in that? It's overkill that our cars can go 140mph when most of us don't drive over 80. A better example may be that it's overkill that the newest video card can get 100fps in the most demanding game available... but, of course, it'll be able to handle anything that is thrown at it for many years. Similarly, the new iPad's display is quite futureproof. The same can't be said for the 1024x768 resolution on the original two iPads. The exact extent of the resolution increase might be "overkill and unnecessary," but there was room for improvement over the older displays and it was addressed and then some, so I don't see a problem or why you would want them to not improve something that they could improve.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stories
My entire soap box is this: we're moving devices into a space (high quality resolution) where there isn't necessary content to use the device appropriately...
You can't expect that to change without the devices coming first. As per my point above about video services, the services are tailored to match the hardware. For example, if there were no devices with resolutions greater than 800x480, none of those services would deliver greater than 480p video. The devices need to come first before the support; support rarely ever comes before devices. Introduce a wildly popular tablet like the new iPad, with it's huge resolution, and there will be more demand for videos and images that are higher quality. With the increase in bandwidth that they'll take up, there will be more demand for the raising or lifting of bandwidth caps in order to keep up. Would we have multi-gigabyte caps if our videos were still 320x240, our music still 128kbps and all of our apps and games could fit on CDs, like back in the 90s? No, the explosion in the size of all of those pushed innovation in bandwidth speeds to accommodate all of it. Similarly, current restraints need to be pushed so they can expand further.
Well, obviously, videos from iTunes, Netflix and YouTube will not look significantly better, since they're far lower resolution than the display is. That's an issue with the services/apps, not the tablet. They're almost certainly not even delivering the highest resolution that they're capable of delivering, since, with no devices sporting such high resolution displays, there was no reason to make the mobile versions of apps/services support such resolutions. I'm sure that that will change in time.
Also, you worry about the size of video downloads, but the future of video isn't in downloads; it's in streaming. Netflix, YouTube, Amazon Video and so on are all streaming services that don't permanently store anything on the device. The only thing that it'll affect is the amount of data that you download, but no matter what that amount is, there will be data rates made available to customers to support it.
I really don't see why you have a problem with this resolution "overkill." If it's overkill when it comes to video, then it may not be (and isn't) with other uses, like text and photos. Even if it's overkill when it comes to everything, where's the harm in that? It's overkill that our cars can go 140mph when most of us don't drive over 80. A better example may be that it's overkill that the newest video card can get 100fps in the most demanding game available... but, of course, it'll be able to handle anything that is thrown at it for many years. Similarly, the new iPad's display is quite futureproof. The same can't be said for the 1024x768 resolution on the original two iPads. The exact extent of the resolution increase might be "overkill and unnecessary," but there was room for improvement over the older displays and it was addressed and then some, so I don't see a problem or why you would want them to not improve something that they could improve.
You can't expect that to change without the devices coming first. As per my point above about video services, the services are tailored to match the hardware. For example, if there were no devices with resolutions greater than 800x480, none of those services would deliver greater than 480p video. The devices need to come first before the support; support rarely ever comes before devices. Introduce a wildly popular tablet like the new iPad, with it's huge resolution, and there will be more demand for videos and images that are higher quality. With the increase in bandwidth that they'll take up, there will be more demand for the raising or lifting of bandwidth caps in order to keep up. Would we have multi-gigabyte caps if our videos were still 320x240, our music still 128kbps and all of our apps and games could fit on CDs, like back in the 90s? No, the explosion in the size of all of those pushed innovation in bandwidth speeds to accommodate all of it. Similarly, current restraints need to be pushed so they can expand further.
The comparison of videos the CNet guy did was the 720p versions (viewed in iPad2) of videos versus the 1080p versions (viewed in New iPad) of videos both downloaded from iTunes. So it's a fair comparison on that end, looking at the highest quality available/viewable content for that device.
I'm not hopeful as you are because our monitors and TVs have exceeded the resolution of these streaming services for quite some time. We've had 1080p HDTVs for years now. We've had high resolution monitors for well over a decade (my first laptop 15" PC from 2002 had 1600x1200 resolution). There is still very little high quality content (aside from Blu-ray) available for people to consume. The HD streaming of all our video services, whether it's from iTunes, Hulu, Amazon, or Netflix, still is poor relative to our devices. The tech has been out there for some time now. These streaming service are still have macro blocking, mosquito noise, aliasing, and bloom effects which seriously hamper the viewing experience. Even if local storage isn't an issue, streaming quotas ARE. If you're a Comcast customer, you're limited to 250GB/mo. Watching one HD movie can easily top 4-5gb per view. Imagine if you have a family streaming different content at different times of the day--you could easily reach that limit, if you haven't already.
I think the car comparison isn't necessarily the same because a higher resolution screen does affect the rest of the experience: there's an increased reliance on processing power/speed which leads to more battery drain, which leads to bigger batteries, and more heat and weight. In cars, you can go faster or slower with no real consequence, and in the real world usage, nobody ever reaches that limit. Whereas in our computing devices, we reach the limits of the battery and processing routinely.
I guess I think our priorities are in different places. I just don't necessarily think a boom in resolution is the best answer to our content issues. We should have addressed color, backlighting (local dimming, perhaps?), before just ramping up resolution (to a non-standard resolution, at that).
Eh. I have a job, so $500 isn't a deal breaker. I pay $500 per season of hockey I play (two seasons a year). As great as a tablet would be, hockey >>>> tablet. Got a smartphone and laptop to take care of my other computing needs.
Yup
I have a laptop and an iPhone 4, and I think it's enough
Got mine today, Staples finally got it. My god, dat screen. First time I saw it my brain freaked out its so good looking. Just screws with your mind to see something that perfect, thats not actually real. Mind = Blown
The comparison of videos the CNet guy did was the 720p versions (viewed in iPad2) of videos versus the 1080p versions (viewed in New iPad) of videos both downloaded from iTunes. So it's a fair comparison on that end, looking at the highest quality available/viewable content for that device.
I'm not hopeful as you are because our monitors and TVs have exceeded the resolution of these streaming services for quite some time. We've had 1080p HDTVs for years now. We've had high resolution monitors for well over a decade (my first laptop 15" PC from 2002 had 1600x1200 resolution). There is still very little high quality content (aside from Blu-ray) available for people to consume. The HD streaming of all our video services, whether it's from iTunes, Hulu, Amazon, or Netflix, still is poor relative to our devices. The tech has been out there for some time now. These streaming service are still have macro blocking, mosquito noise, aliasing, and bloom effects which seriously hamper the viewing experience. Even if local storage isn't an issue, streaming quotas ARE. If you're a Comcast customer, you're limited to 250GB/mo. Watching one HD movie can easily top 4-5gb per view. Imagine if you have a family streaming different content at different times of the day--you could easily reach that limit, if you haven't already.
I think the car comparison isn't necessarily the same because a higher resolution screen does affect the rest of the experience: there's an increased reliance on processing power/speed which leads to more battery drain, which leads to bigger batteries, and more heat and weight. In cars, you can go faster or slower with no real consequence, and in the real world usage, nobody ever reaches that limit. Whereas in our computing devices, we reach the limits of the battery and processing routinely.
I guess I think our priorities are in different places. I just don't necessarily think a boom in resolution is the best answer to our content issues. We should have addressed color, backlighting (local dimming, perhaps?), before just ramping up resolution (to a non-standard resolution, at that).
Well Netflix updated it's icon for the retina, hd streaming coming soon. Will have to see what hd streaming is like
So this new iPad seems to get to hot for a fair number of people it seems? I read an article saying it was reaching 116F which seems kind of high for a item that has to be held. Any here experience that issue? It also seems that it reaches the highest temps when being used while plugged in and I don't get why you would use it plugged in anyways, or at least regularly, as the whole idea of a tablet is to be able to easily carry it around and use it.
So this new iPad seems to get to hot for a fair number of people it seems? I read an article saying it was reaching 116F which seems kind of high for a item that has to be held. Any here experience that issue? It also seems that it reaches the highest temps when being used while plugged in and I don't get why you would use it plugged in anyways, or at least regularly, as the whole idea of a tablet is to be able to easily carry it around and use it.
Ive noticed it gets a little warm, no warmer than my Ipad 2 got, maybe slightly warmer. Havent experienced the burning hot temperature that some people say.
Ive noticed it gets a little warm, no warmer than my Ipad 2 got, maybe slightly warmer. Havent experienced the burning hot temperature that some people say.
People exaggerate to the nth degree. If it were anywhere close to "burning hot," that part of the internal board would be fried and the entire iPad would cease working. I'm sure that it's only slightly warmer than some people are used to and, thus, more than they're comfortable with. I'm sure that most people, at least tech fans, have had past devices get that warm or even warmer and wouldn't be that concerned about it. It may still be a design flaw and something that can be corrected, but I'm sure that it's not anything too out of the ordinary or dangerous to the user or the device.
I own a 64gb 3G iPad 2 and the new iPad does not have enough new features to warrant me to upgrade. I will wait for the iPad 4 and hope for some crazy new additions to it,as for now I'll stick to what i got.
I will say this, I played with the new one at best buy and boy is it beautiful.
Played with the new iPad yesterday at Best Buy myself. I'm an Android fan girl, but the iPad wins with the apps. I love my Transformer Prime, but the lack of tablet friendly apps is frustrating.
__________________ Colorado Avalanche Prospects-- News and updates on the future of the Colorado Avalanche! Colorado's Future -- Team * Manning * Landeskog * Tulowitzki
People exaggerate to the nth degree. If it were anywhere close to "burning hot," that part of the internal board would be fried and the entire iPad would cease working. I'm sure that it's only slightly warmer than some people are used to and, thus, more than they're comfortable with. I'm sure that most people, at least tech fans, have had past devices get that warm or even warmer and wouldn't be that concerned about it. It may still be a design flaw and something that can be corrected, but I'm sure that it's not anything too out of the ordinary or dangerous to the user or the device.
Yeah, the heat issue sounds overblown.
I'm about a week late, but...have any iPad3 owners noted poor wifi reception/connection? This one worries me, as I need my wifi working 100%, all the time. My 4S is incredible on wifi, I can't see why the iPad3 should be any different.
I'm about a week late, but...have any iPad3 owners noted poor wifi reception/connection? This one worries me, as I need my wifi working 100%, all the time. My 4S is incredible on wifi, I can't see why the iPad3 should be any different.
No issues for me. Didn't even hear about that issue until now
I'm about a week late, but...have any iPad3 owners noted poor wifi reception/connection? This one worries me, as I need my wifi working 100%, all the time. My 4S is incredible on wifi, I can't see why the iPad3 should be any different.
Got one yesterday, and it is gorgeous. Very pleased.
Anyone have some favorite hi-res apps to recommend? I've been using IGN Touch, Flipboard and Stanza (comics look in-freaking-credible) a lot, but there aren't a lot of retina-display games out, it seems.
* Landeskog * Tulowitzki
