Why dont Samsung tablets have "retina" display? (They make the new iPads display)

[Tefal]

Is that why sometimes lights can seem really bright but when you look at them you can hardly see them?

not sure what you mean there.


rod are low light sensitive but black and white and fuzzy (it's why at night you can see but everything is grey and a bit blurry) the rods are col,our sensitive and highly detailed but need lots of light and only face nearly straight ahead.

 

[willhub]

not sure what you mean there.


rod are low light sensitive but black and white and fuzzy (it's why at night you can see but everything is grey and a bit blurry) the rods are col,our sensitive and highly detailed but need lots of light and only face nearly straight ahead.

The flashing blue light for HDD activity on my tower is faint when I look at it, but when I turn away from it and look at it in the corner of my eye, it's really bright.

 

[uchuff]

Nah, just like it's mot Apple's fault most internet videos are Flash based I suppose?

Last study I read said 80% of Internet video is available in HTML5, I certainly never have a problem.

 

[Tefal]

The flashing blue light for HDD activity on my tower is faint when I look at it, but when I turn away from it and look at it in the corner of my eye, it's really bright.

dark room?

if so yeah quite possibly.

 

[aln]

Nah, just like it's mot Apple's fault most internet videos are Flash based I suppose?

Its really not, to be fair.

With regards to images looking fuzzy, presumably thats because of upscaling? If so, it's hardly something worth complaining about when apple drive the market forward. I'm glad too, I hold the view point that until we can completely rid ourselves of the nasty hack that is AA, screens simply aren't good enough.

 

[estebanrey]

Last study I read said 80% of Internet video is available in HTML5, I certainly never have a problem.

Welcome to world of internet video, the rest of us have been enjoying it for years

 

[aln]

I'm interested in how much battery power doubling the pixels will sap.

 

[estebanrey]

I'm interested in how much battery power doubling the pixels will sap.

Theoretically none as being half the size and thus giving off half the amount of light, each pixel should require half the power (obviously it's probably not exactly half but u get the idea)

 

[LordSplodge]

Yes, the Asus Transformer and Transformer Prime.

Say what?

Nah, just like it's mot Apple's fault most internet videos are Flash based I suppose?

Nice try troll. Jog on.

 

[LordSplodge]

I'm interested in how much battery power doubling the pixels will sap.

Go look at how much extra battery Apple had to add to the 3rd Gen iPad. Now that is partially to power the LTE chip as well as the screen.

If they do end up making 'retina display' MacBook Pros I should imagine they'll have no choice but to lose the optical drive simply to get a bigger battery in.

 

[estebanrey]

Jog on

The 1990s have just called, they'd like their expression back.

 

[Rroff]

A scientific study was done a few years ago which shows that fighter pilots can pick out a frame from 500, and recall it to memory. I don't see any reason why they can do that, over a race car driver, or even a top gamer.

I'd be willing to put money on passing a blind test between 60/120/300 fps, but then I've spend an extreme amount of time gaming in front of a 150hz CRT with 250+ fps.

It'd be harder on an LCD because the technology works differently, but I'm still pretty sure I'd be able to figure it out at those extremes. Now a differece between 250 and 300, I don't think I could (the lack of ever having experienced over 200hz instantly loses any reference points), or a difference between 110-120, maybe not, but 60/120/300 would be easy.

Correct - in testing those regarded as top fighter pilots were often capable of reliably reacting to information that was only present for 1/500th of a second. A cross section of more everyday people showed an average of approx 1/200th of a second - in general I'd say most people don't get any significant advantage above 100fps and it starts to tail off above 60fps - 120Hz panels are a nice thing to have (for me the difference between 60 and 120Hz is like night and day) but I don't see the need to go higher for 99% of the population.

People also don't seem to appreciate that theres a difference between the minimum framerate required to see fluid motion and the max framerate that the average person can still take useful information from (as mentioned above) but also that it depends on the medium, motion blur if present or not and the interactivity the user has with the image they are viewing - typically if someone can interact with the scene rather than just view it the framerate required for them to perceive fluid motion doubles.

Anyhow back to the original topic - I own a Samsung Galaxy Note and the display on that is pretty decent I definitely rate the device a lot higher than the ipad.

 

[aln]

Go look at how much extra battery Apple had to add to the 3rd Gen iPad. Now that is partially to power the LTE chip as well as the screen.

If they do end up making 'retina display' MacBook Pros I should imagine they'll have no choice but to lose the optical drive simply to get a bigger battery in.

Rumour is it's already lost the optical drive, and I'm sure most of their users won't mind. Their business model would prefer you to use the apple store, or itunes for software, and it's not as if there aren't a whole bunch of better ways to connect to a computer. Meh, with the lack of focus of PC software sales in brick and mortar stores, even windows users are probably finding less and less use for an optical drive.

Again, the power saving advantage of OLED would probably be growing here.

 

[james.miller]

Forget retina, it's unimportant. Retina ceased to mean anything when Apple changed the definition of it, anyway. Retina used to be defined as a display with 330dpi, now the new ipad, with it's 264dpi, is also retina. But that's ok because apparently you hold tablets further away so the pixels appear smaller, or so they say.....

....I've never seen anybody using a table at arms length.


anyway, don't be surprised at all if samsung release something very similar. After all, if they cant use the exact screen, what's to stop them using something.....a little bit bigger? http://www.phonearena.com/news/Sams...have-been-snapped-crackled-and-popped_id28399

Theoretically none as being half the size and thus giving off half the amount of light, each pixel should require half the power (obviously it's probably not exactly half but u get the idea)

if you send half the power to something half the size, then you are probably going to end up with something around half the light output (or 1/4 ?). I'm fairly sure shrinking pixels has never really had that sort of effect.

I own a Samsung Galaxy Note and the display on that is pretty decent I definitely rate the device a lot higher than the ipad.

Yeah i like bananas more than hula hoops.

 

[willhub]

Wait a min, so my smartphone is literally a retina display if the 264ppi is because it's "held at arms length" see I hold my smartphone at arms length.

 

[MeEsH BaKkA]

Not an apple fanboy by any stretch of the imagination but people who are ragging on the apple retina displays need to read some proper reviews of the screen itself. It's pretty much a reference quality monitor in respect to colour reproduction, veiwing angles and resolutions.

They are very very good screens and by far the best ever fitted to a mobile device and most likely far better than any screens you use at home. The hardware they are used in injunction with... Well...

 

[Rroff]

Yeah i like bananas more than hula hoops.

I don't think its irrelevant (both in terms of topic and functionality) the Note can quite comfortably manage most of the functionality of a tablet depending a little on your uses and has a 1280x800 320dpi display.

 

[james.miller]

Wait a min, so my smartphone is literally a retina display if the 264ppi is because it's "held at arms length" see I hold my smartphone at arms length.

Yes, it really is that stupid. At first it was a term used to describe a display over a certain dpi, now it describes a combination of dpi and distance, presumable because Apple absolutely had to have the term 'retina' attached to the new ipad in some way. So yes i guess just about any display could qualify if held far enough away lol.

see I hold my smartphone at arms length

You must look hilarious walking down the street, using your phones with your arms extended right out in front of you.

I don't think its irrelevant (both in terms of topic and functionality) the Note can quite comfortably manage most of the functionality of a tablet depending a little on your uses and has a [Pentile] 1280x800 320dpi display.

I cant agree, its a good 2 inches smaller than the smallest of what most people would call a tablet. it's half the size of any ipad - they are two very different devices. I dont feel a note-sized device is a good alternative to a 10" display. And no, the screen isnt as good lol

 

[aln]

Correct - in testing those regarded as top fighter pilots were often capable of reliably reacting to information that was only present for 1/500th of a second. A cross section of more everyday people showed an average of approx 1/200th of a second - in general I'd say most people don't get any significant advantage above 100fps and it starts to tail off above 60fps - 120Hz panels are a nice thing to have (for me the difference between 60 and 120Hz is like night and day) but I don't see the need to go higher for 99% of the population.

I'd say we shouldn't be aiming for the lower median, but currently use a 120hz LCD and enjoy using it. As stated previously, I had a 150hz CRT and the majority of LCD screens were just unacceptable. There are a lot of people that feel the same, but it's hard to argue with the granpa's of the world.

People also don't seem to appreciate that theres a difference between the minimum framerate required to see fluid motion and the max framerate that the average person can still take useful information from (as mentioned above) but also that it depends on the medium, motion blur if present or not and the interactivity the user has with the image they are viewing - typically if someone can interact with the scene rather than just view it the framerate required for them to perceive fluid motion doubles.

Bang on.

It'd take me about half a second to tell the difference between a game running at 50, 100, and 200fps because the differences in input lag would make me feel very disconnected from my character. This works regardless of screen.

On a screen with flicker, again right away I can tell you which is which with no effort on my part. I'd get a heacahe the second I looked at =< 60hz.

On an LCD and a panning image, it'd probably take a bit of effort, but I'm confident I could identify which was which by how smooth the image panning was.

A static image on an LCD would be difficult as flicker is supposed to be mitigated somewhat in the tech, and it may depend on the screens involved, and I would possibly fail.

 

[Rroff]

I cant agree, its a good 2 inches smaller than the smallest of what most people would call a tablet. it's half the size of any ipad - they are two very different devices. And no, the screen isnt as good lol.

Your very defensive of apple. It might be pentile but its a big step up from previous pentile displays and pretty decent. Granted there are some thing where it would fall short in tablet functionality i.e. it wouldn't match a good table for showing off your photo album but its still pretty capable when it comes to most tablet uses like internet browsing, bit of light desktop publishing, etc.