Five Things Android Tablets Need to Succeed: Editorial by Android Police

[NikolaeVarius]

A 10" 2560x1600 Retina display tablet would be jaw dropping.

If you want a display that costs a 300 bucks more because of the 1% yield they would get from those displays, be my guest.

It would be completely pointless.

 

[Brian Stirling]

No device that small needs such a high resolution. I say the largest should be 1280×720 aka 720p.

If you scaled up an iPhone 4 with a 3.5 inch 960x640 display to 8.5 inches the resolution would exceed 3.6MP. A 1920x1200 screen is about 2.3MP and a 1366x896 screen is 1.2MP.

So, WTF were you saying?


Brian

 

[TheStu]

If you scaled up an iPhone 4 with a 3.5 inch 960x640 display to 8.5 inches the resolution would exceed 3.6MP. A 1920x1200 screen is about 2.3MP and a 1366x896 screen is 1.2MP.

So, WTF were you saying?


Brian

In the case of the iPhone 4's display, everything else is upscaled 2x. Icons that were 57px square are now 114px square. If they had remained at 57px square, then they would have been freakishly tiny.

If the OS that is being put onto these devices is Resolution Independent, or aware of the insanely high resolution of some specific devices then it would work.

Also, am wondering how the higher res on the new Moto devices will look compared to the 800*480 on the Droid or the 960*640 on the iPhone.

 

[Brian Stirling]

If you want a display that costs a 300 bucks more because of the 1% yield they would get from those displays, be my guest.

It would be completely pointless.

There should be little difference in yield even at that resolution. If we were talking silicon at 30nm you'd be in the trillions of devices in that much real-estate. The major reason you don't see the higher resolution screens is power consumption. The difference is not in the back lighting but in switching the pixels on/off. However, each generation requires less power per pixel.

So, while the current gen may be limited, due to battery requirements to, say, 1366x896 the next gen should easily see 1920x1200 for the same power give-or-take...


Brian

 

[Brian Stirling]

In the case of the iPhone 4's display, everything else is upscaled 2x. Icons that were 57px square are now 114px square. If they had remained at 57px square, then they would have been freakishly tiny.

If the OS that is being put onto these devices is Resolution Independent, or aware of the insanely high resolution of some specific devices then it would work.

Also, am wondering how the higher res on the new Moto devices will look compared to the 800*480 on the Droid or the 960*640 on the iPhone.

First to follow up on my prior ...

In the print world the rule of thumb is that you want at least 300dpi with some arguing 450dpi would be better. At 300dpi or 90K pixels/in^2, a tablet of 8.5 inch screen would have about 3.2MP. At the higher value of 450dpi the resolution would be over 7MP.

Now, when you increase the resolution for a given size screen then you do have to increase the number of pixels for things like icons -- so what, it just makes it possible to make more intricate and detailed icons.

There are a couple reasons why I'd want the higher resolution screen...

First, as I mentioned before, I'd like to be able to work with AutoCAD drawings and higher resolution is really important for that. Secondly, as a photographer, doing image review from a high resolution pro DSLR (16MP+) it's just better to have more pixels. Finally, I'd argue that an 8.5 inch tablet with 1920x1200 resolution would be more readable than a 10 inch tablet at 1024x600 -- and not a little more readable...


Brian

 

[TheStu]

First to follow up on my prior ...

In the print world the rule of thumb is that you want at least 300dpi with some arguing 450dpi would be better. At 300dpi or 90K pixels/in^2, a tablet of 8.5 inch screen would have about 3.2MP. At the higher value of 450dpi the resolution would be over 7MP.

Now, when you increase the resolution for a given size screen then you do have to increase the number of pixels for things like icons -- so what, it just makes it possible to make more intricate and detailed icons.

There are a couple reasons why I'd want the higher resolution screen...

First, as I mentioned before, I'd like to be able to work with AutoCAD drawings and higher resolution is really important for that. Secondly, as a photographer, doing image review from a high resolution pro DSLR (16MP+) it's just better to have more pixels. Finally, I'd argue that an 8.5 inch tablet with 1920x1200 resolution would be more readable than a 10 inch tablet at 1024x600 -- and not a little more readable...


Brian

I am not arguing that a higher res screen wouldn't be a good thing, but if the OS can't support it properly then you have text that is a hairsbreadth in height, and icons that are too small to be effectively tapped.

Basically, you will be stuck the some of the same problems that desktop OSes have on a tablet, and a slew of new ones.

You can't just say 'I want a screen at X" with 16mil*10mil pixels of resolution' without also adding '...and an OS that can support that properly.'

 

[Bateluer]

I am not arguing that a higher res screen wouldn't be a good thing, but if the OS can't support it properly then you have text that is a hairsbreadth in height, and icons that are too small to be effectively tapped.

Basically, you will be stuck the some of the same problems that desktop OSes have on a tablet, and a slew of new ones.

You can't just say 'I want a screen at X" with 16mil*10mil pixels of resolution' without also adding '...and an OS that can support that properly.'

You guys know you can make the icons have more pixels, WxH, right? Doesn't seem like it'd be a hard feature to implement in an OS.

I'd love to have a higher resolution screen in my phone, and they are coming, but I think it'll be a while before we see 1920x1080 displays.

 

[MrX8503]

After using the iPhone, I'd like to see 300dpi minimum implemented in all mobile devices. I dont care how long it takes to get there, just as long we get there.

 

[TheStu]

You guys know you can make the icons have more pixels, WxH, right? Doesn't seem like it'd be a hard feature to implement in an OS.

I'd love to have a higher resolution screen in my phone, and they are coming, but I think it'll be a while before we see 1920x1080 displays.

It isn't hard for Apple, they have 3 resolutions to support, and one of them is just a 2x scale up another. It won't be hard for Microsoft they are controlling the specs on their devices. It shouldn't be hard for HPalm, they are/will be making all their own devices. Finally, RIM won't have a problem for all the same reasons.

Android will have the problem, anything from 320*480 to 1024*640, and beyond, and in many cases the aspect ratios do not match up. You have 854*480 on the Droid, 960*540 on the Atrix, 320*240 on the Flipout and 480*320 on the Backflip. And that is just Motorola.

As I said, the OS needs to be able to adapt to all these different resolutions, because HTC, and Motorola and Samsung and all the makers can put any UI they want onto those devices but if the Bob's Burgertown App doesn't follow the guidelines from Google telling them how best to account for the 27 different resolutions and aspect ratios on all the different devices, you will get icons that are nasty looking for whole new reasons.

I am not saying that it is impossible, I am not saying that Google is going to fail, and if it wasn't for the reasons that I outlined above that excludes all the other major players, I wouldn't only go after Google (and I don't really consider what I am doing as 'going after them'). I am just saying that when the incredibly high resolution displays start hitting with 300 dpi+ then the OS makers need to have a plan in place on how to address it.

 

[DivideBYZero]

AutoCAD on a tablet. Yeah.

 

[DivideBYZero]

Yea, I forgot about that one. They released that... last year I think? My mom still had her Pearl at the time.

Or was it the Mac version that they released last year... I can't remember.

Do DRMed iTunes files (all videos and I think some music still) work with that software? And I am assuming that it does what the Microsoft Windows Phone 7 Connector does, pulls the playlist information out of iTunes to get the file locations and names and what not.

And of course the Pre did (or still does) pretend to be an iPod to work with iTunes right out of the box.

No, BBOS won't play DRM'd AAC, but regular AAC is fine.

 

[Brian Stirling]

Without a better pointing device AutoCAD would be unworkable on a tablet but with a mini trackball you could get by. I don't think I'd want to create a large drawing on a tablet but viewing, pulling dimensions and printing -- hell yeah.

Yes, Android does have issues that Apple doesn't have with respect to the number of variations in the devices it needs to support. And you're quite right, without the OS being tweaked to do so the device would be useless. This kind of limitation has always been with us and if Android wishes to remain in business years from now it had better figure it out.

One of the great things about the semi-conductor business is that there's always tomorrow. Things that would only be possible on a desktop in one generation become practical on laptops the next. Similarly, mobile devices like smart phones and tablets may require another generation to be practical, but over time we will have smart phones with 1920x1200 screens, 2GB+ RAM and storage over 256GB.

Time marches on!


Brian

 

[kaerflog]

I still say you're insane for wanting an ultra-high resolution on such a tiny-ass display - talk about eyestrain! Horrible, horrible, eye strain.

Well, we're not talking about computer monitor here.
You either have to set it on native resolution or else it won't look right.
With touch screen, you zoom in and out to fit you.

 

[Brian Stirling]

I still say you're insane for wanting an ultra-high resolution on such a tiny-ass display - talk about eyestrain! Horrible, horrible, eye strain.

If the icons and text were scaled up why would higher resolution be worse? Yes, if you dramatically increase the resolution but keep things like icons and text the same size in pixels is could well make things harder to read, but if they were scaled up or if you zoomed in your problem goes away.

By your logic we'd be better off with lower resolution. You may hate to hear this but we WILL have smart phones with ballpark 1920x1200 resolution and we will see that within 5 years. Of course, you can always hang onto your cheapy feature phone...


Brian

 

[Bateluer]

By your logic we'd be better off with lower resolution. You may hate to hear this but we WILL have smart phones with ballpark 1920x1200 resolution and we will see that within 5 years. Of course, you can always hang onto your cheapy feature phone...

I can believe this, but I suspect it'll actually be 1920x1080, 16x9 aspect ratio. Its more common, likely to be cheaper, and better matches motion picture aspect ratios.

 

[ChAoTiCpInOy]

Next iPad wouldn't be 16:9. I don't think tablets should be 16:9 design because yes they're good for videos, but is everyone going to be using their tables primarily as a video device? I think the next iPad would be 2x the 1024x768 or maybe 2x the iPhone resolution 960x640 so it's easier to scale.

 

[Brian Stirling]

I can believe this, but I suspect it'll actually be 1920x1080, 16x9 aspect ratio. Its more common, likely to be cheaper, and better matches motion picture aspect ratios.

Yes, that is possible and one of the reasons is the direct match for HDTV. By then phones will all be shooting video in 1080P so matching the screen res would make sense. I'd prefer a little closer to 3:2 ratio myself but 16:9 is a good bet...


Brian

 

[Brian Stirling]

I just saw this, have a look...

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...2_will_quadruple_resolution_to_2048x1536.html


Hmmmm,

Brian

 

[Puddle Jumper]

I just saw this, have a look...

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...2_will_quadruple_resolution_to_2048x1536.html


Hmmmm,

Brian

That seems unlikely. It's been a little while since I've looked at resultion support on SoC's but afaik most of the current ones max out at 1440x900 or less.

 

[zerocool84]

I just saw this, have a look...

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...2_will_quadruple_resolution_to_2048x1536.html


Hmmmm,

Brian

lol no one with average intelligence would take that seriously. No tablet will have 2048x1536 resolution. That's ridiculous even to take that as a rumor.

 

[akugami]

Apple fans have short memories. Back in the day, that's exactly what they said regarding things the core OS couldn't do. "That's ok, there's an app for that!"

There's a little bit of this "that's ok there's an app for it" in both camps from day one. Both camps have been guilty of it so don't put it all on the iOS camp.

Not waking up on time? There's an app for that.

There's a lot of things Android can't do either. What you're furthering is just the Android vs iOS bickering. The iOS alarm issue is a bug. Now, it was a pretty devastating bug for some (reports are some lost their jobs due to being late) but it's not like Android is bug free either and the shoe could have easily been on the other foot.

I still say you're insane for wanting an ultra-high resolution on such a tiny-ass display - talk about eyestrain! Horrible, horrible, eye strain.

Don't get stuck in the deficiencies of past OS's that weren't designed with high resolution large displays in mind. An OS that is accurately designed for higher resolution displays should be able to intelligently scale the font and interface so you have razor sharp text that is large enough to be easily legible.

One thing that Apple has done with iOS is that any app designed for the iPhone can either be set at the original resolution in a letterboxed mode on the iPad or you can scale it up to fit the iPad. Granted it doesn't look as smooth when scaled up, it is nevertheless functional.

I am not arguing that a higher res screen wouldn't be a good thing, but if the OS can't support it properly then you have text that is a hairsbreadth in height, and icons that are too small to be effectively tapped.

As much as people hate the control freak nature of Apple, that's one thing that turns out in favor of Apple. Because they control all aspects of their product, they can make sure the OS properly supports a higher resolution display at the time of release. Obviously 3rd party developers will still need to update their apps. And that's also where a negative comes in. Apple is so secretive that most 3rd party developers don't know about some of the hardware changes until the public does so updating for things like the "retina display" isn't there on day one.

 

[Brian Stirling]

lol no one with average intelligence would take that seriously. No tablet will have 2048x1536 resolution. That's ridiculous even to take that as a rumor.

Actually I agree that 2048x1536 is an unlikely resolution. Not that having over 3MP is unlikely so much the aspect ratio. Also, a tab like that would be used for HD playback and it makes little sense to spend CPU power scaling up from 1920.

So, my guess is this is just a wild rumor. I always thought the 4:3 aspect ratio of the iPad was a little too square with 3:2 being more to my liking. A display in the range of 1920x1280 would be more my cup of tea.

So, if 2048x1536 isn't in the cards this go round what will the iPad2 be ... I'd guess closer to 1536x1152 so perhaps one of the numbers from the rumor will be correct! :whiste:


Brian

 

[Brian Stirling]

Just did a Google with "ipad 2 resolution" and there are a LOT of references to the 2048x1536 resolution. I don't know that that means anything and it's likely that many of them are merely picking up on what others are saying, but it is obvious that something has happened in the last couple days...


Brian

 

[ChAoTiCpInOy]

Just did a Google with "ipad 2 resolution" and there are a LOT of references to the 2048x1536 resolution. I don't know that that means anything and it's likely that many of them are merely picking up on what others are saying, but it is obvious that something has happened in the last couple days...


Brian

That's just a doubling of the iPad 1 resolution. It's like how Apple took the iPhone 3G/3GS resolution and doubled to get the iPhone 4 resolution. It's a good idea because scaling is a lot easier.

 

[Brian Stirling]

That's just a doubling of the iPad 1 resolution. It's like how Apple took the iPhone 3G/3GS resolution and doubled to get the iPhone 4 resolution. It's a good idea because scaling is a lot easier.

You know, that may just explain it. At 2048x1536 they are exactly double the linear resolution or 4X the areal resolution.

Still, that would tend to complicate the scaling for an HD movie UNLESS they don't scale and merely use the inner 1920 by 1080 pixels. Doing that they'd lose almost a half inch in width for HD playback.


Brian