• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

** The Official 1/27 "Come See Our Latest Creation" Apple Media Event Thread **

Page 13 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
0roo0roo said:
i don't get that wide screen complaint.
how big would you want it. or how small and useless would it be in wide screen. it just doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

The screen is 1024x768. It should be 720p-ish. So 1280x720 or 1280x800. This way you could watch movies as intended, you could fit 2 pages side-by-side in landscape, or one page + controls in portrait.
 
silverpig said:
The screen is 1024x768. It should be 720p-ish. So 1280x720 or 1280x800. This way you could watch movies as intended, you could fit 2 pages side-by-side in landscape, or one page + controls in portrait.
Click to expand...

which would be fine if the ipad were 24"
a 720p 16:9 screen would be extremely narrow. two side by side pages of extremely narrow height, not much point. it sacrifices all other functionality for video playback. more square screen is required for actual usability esp in any orientation. 16:9 just doesnt work small,hell even a 19" 16:9 screen is ridiculous if you've ever used one. its just cramped.
 
0roo0roo said:
which would be fine if the ipad were 24"
a 720p 16:9 screen would be extremely narrow. two side by side pages of extremely narrow height, not much point. it sacrifices all other functionality for video playback. more square screen is required for actual usability esp in any orientation. 16:9 just doesnt work small,hell even a 19" 16:9 screen is ridiculous if you've ever used one. its just cramped.
Click to expand...
Well it doesn't have to be 16:9, it really just needs to be 1280 pixels wide. As long as it were that wide, then it would have no problem with any kind of widescreen 720P video.
 
ViRGE said:
Well it doesn't have to be 16:9, it really just needs to be 1280 pixels wide. As long as it were that wide, then it would have no problem with any kind of widescreen 720P video.
Click to expand...

This doesn't make much sense to me. How does a 1280 pixel width help if the height doesn't match up with the correct aspect ratio?
 
i dont get it though...the screen size is 9.7" - how much resolution do you really want in there? i mean, i havent even heard of anything above 1024x600/768 around that size. when you go to 11", you can squeeze in 1366x768, or even 1600x900 (i think sony makes one, not sure), but 9.7" with 1024x768 i think is just fine.
 
CoinOperatedBoy said:
This doesn't make much sense to me. How does a 1280 pixel width help if the height doesn't match up with the correct aspect ratio?
Click to expand...

720p = 1280x720. To do 720p, a screen has to be at least this big.

I don't personally think the iPad needs 720p or a wide-aspect screen but the point is that in order to display that resolution, you need 1280 horizontal pixels. On a 1024x768 screen, that means 16:9 videos would display at 1024x576 (leaving 96-pixel-thick black bars on the top and the bottom).
 
Last edited:
0roo0roo said:
which would be fine if the ipad were 24"
a 720p 16:9 screen would be extremely narrow. two side by side pages of extremely narrow height, not much point. it sacrifices all other functionality for video playback. more square screen is required for actual usability esp in any orientation. 16:9 just doesnt work small,hell even a 19" 16:9 screen is ridiculous if you've ever used one. its just cramped.
Click to expand...

My 1280x800 MBP laptop screen is a very usable dimension. Just scale the entire thing down in size from 13" to 10".
 
AstroManLuca said:
720p = 1280x720. To do 720p, a screen has to be at least this big.

I don't personally think the iPad needs 720p or a wide-aspect screen but the point is that in order to display that resolution, you need 1280 horizontal pixels. On a 1024x768 screen, that means 16:9 videos would display at 1024x576 (leaving 96-pixel-thick black bars on the top and the bottom).
Click to expand...

I know this. ViRgE didn't specify the height, which made me wonder why 1280 was important to him, but 720 was not. You obviously can't have 16:9 with one but not the other, unless you stretch the image. As to 0roo0roo's point, why would rescaling matter with a 10" display?

People have really been reeled in by the terms "HD", "720p", "1080p" that they're demanding these features on 10" devices, which is utterly pointless unless you're talking about a freaking visor with your eyes literally an inch away.
 
Last edited:
CoinOperatedBoy said:
I know this. ViRgE didn't specify the height, which made me wonder why 1280 was important to him, but 720 was not. You obviously can't have 16:9 with one but not the other, unless you stretch the image. As to 0roo0roo's point, why would rescaling matter with a 10" display?

People have really been reeled in by the terms "HD", "720p", "1080p" that they're demanding these features on 10" devices, which is utterly pointless unless you're talking about a freaking visor with your eyes literally an inch away.
Click to expand...
I just don't think they should be calling it an HD/720P device if they can't actually show 720P without downscaling.
 
Last edited:
ViRGE said:
I just don't think they should be calling it an HD/720P device if they can't actually show 720P without scaling.
Click to expand...
Christ, there were only around three display in the entire world that were ever made with the native resolution 1280x720, drop the bone, doggie. 🙄
 
I listened to tuaw's show last night, they'd gone from 1/2 of them getting one after the announcement to everyone but one guy who's going to replace his MBP this year saying no.

They all agreed it's going to be a commercial success and that the people who were trashing it were doing so without seeing one or using one.

The other thing I read that was thought provoking was someone musing that if Apple had gone ahead & essentially copied say a Dell Mini 10V and Apple'd it, and sold it for $600-$700 it would have done pretty well.

What will be interesting is to see if the 2-3 lb tablets with 2-3 hours of battery life running Windows 7 and a touchscreen UI do as well as everyone seems to think they will.

Android doesn't support Flash yet, so on the browser front it's the same, Android is essentially crippled with it's internal RAM limitations for app storage, so that'll be interesting too. I had to hack my Android phone with a custom ROM to bypass the app storage issue and use more than a dozen apps.

Balmer called the HP Slate "sort of a prototype" which translated means it doesn't actually exist yet. The video at CES was a promotional thing, and it's demoing vaporware at this point.

Arcos's tablet isn't meeting the expectations of it's purchasers yet from what I read.
 
ViRGE said:
I just don't think they should be calling it an HD/720P device if they can't actually show 720P without downscaling.
Click to expand...

Who is calling it that? Certainly none of Apple's marketing materials. They claim the possibility of playing 720p H.264 videos, but I see no references to an HD display or calling the iPad an "HD device" anywhere on their site.

I assume there was a similar outcry about the Zune HD, the display of which has a whopping 480 x 272 resolution.
 
Last edited:
They all agreed it's going to be a commercial success and that the people who were trashing it were doing so without seeing one or using one.
Click to expand...

seeing one + using one =/= spending $500 on one

I find the thought of replacing an MBP with an iPad ridiculous on the basis of no flash alone.

no netflix/no hulu = no care.
 
Last edited:
The other interesting thing, is that while the tech isn't disrutive, per se, putting out a completely propriatry device that duplicates some traditionally PC based activity is.

I suspect some of the angst about this device is related directly to that.
 
I took some lumps for talking about gaming on the iPad...

http://www.electronista.com/articles/10/02/05/apple.catching.up.to.nintendo.in.dev.interest/

iPhone game development overtaking DS, PSP




The iPhone platform is more popular to write games for than the Nintendo DS and Sony PSP, according to a new study from Game Developer Research. Demand for the iPhone has surged to where about 19 percent of all game developers are writing for the iPhone and iPod touch. The figure is more than twice as high as for the DS and PSP and results in three quarters of all mobile game developers writing for Apple's handhelds.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top