Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 7th Mar 2012 22:59 UTC
Apple And it was that time of the year again - Apple held one of its product announcements. This one focussed on the iPad mostly, and while some will call it a disappointment merely because virtually everything had already been leaked, I'm still in awe over the fact the newly announced iPad has a 2048x1536 display. My mind is blown.
Permalink for comment 509884
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Not really Retina, is it?
by d3vi1 on Wed 7th Mar 2012 23:53 UTC in reply to "Not really Retina, is it?"
d3vi1
Member since:
2006-01-28

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but Apple made a big deal out of the iPhone 4/4s having 326ppi and went to great lengths to tell everyone that the human eye was unable to discern more than 300 or so ppi. They coined the term "retina" based on pixel density alone, not perceived sharpness at different viewing distances.

And now they're saying this new iPad's "measly" 264ppi is retina display spec as well, just because you hold it further away from you?!

Here's the correction you're looking for: when using an iPhone you're usually holding it closer to your head than an iPad. Apple estimates that most people will hold the iPhone at a distance of 10" (25cm for normal people) and an iPad at 15" (38cm).
I can say that I mostly agree as I usually hold my iPhone at almost 35cm and my iPad at roughly 40cm, but their point is still valid.

At 330dpi a pixel is 0.077mm wide so the width of a pixel would be 0.0176470995˚(degrees) at 25cm. At 264dpi a pixel is 0.096mm so the width of a pixel would be 0.0144747229˚(degrees) at 38cm. As such, the pixels seem even smaller on an iPad3 (if you use Apple's math). I assume they should look about the same at the distances I use. My math might be wrong, but it's been ages since I needed trigonometry.

Reply Parent Score: 6