Aikouka
Lifer
- Nov 27, 2001
- 30,383
- 912
- 126
No. It will most like be the same size as it is on the iPad 2.
I was referring to how it would look without any magnification/zoom/enlarge (whatever you want to call it) effects applied. To me, if you have to enlarge it just to make it viewable, then it loses some of its value. It's like older folks that lower the resolution of their monitor because they simply cannot read the text.
An image looks worse when you try to blow it up to a larger physical size, which isn't happening.
You're right about that.
Honestly, the reason I never bought an iPad 2 was because I thought the resolution was too low. Then I bought my wife one, and I realized that was silly. It does a lot with that low resolution.
I guess I looked at it from a monitor perspective originally. If I wanted a 10" monitor, I'd probably prefer that it be somewhere around 1024x768. I'm so used to 1920x1200 on my 27" monitors... it will seem quite odd if the iPad 3 has a higher resolution when it doesn't even cover 25% of my monitor's display area.
I'd definitely buy an iPad 3 if it didn't have a retina display, but I won't complain that they're adding it.
It doesn't really sway me either way as well. My real goal is just to get a 3G-based model as that's what I really wanted. Unfortunately, I waited hours in line, and they had no 64GB 3G models left (black or white). There were a few old ladies in front of me that were talking about getting that model for their husbands, and I have no idea why they would need 64GB for reading books. :|
Although, if the only difference is the retina display and maybe a quad-core CPU... I may just get a 3G iPad 2.