Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple faking 489 to 815 PPI on iPhone 4 ads

digitalsociety.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–55 of 55 posts

Re: Apple faking 489 to 815 PPI on iPhone 4 ads

#51

Post by VMG »

mirkules wrote: post #44
tomjen3 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you actually see the difference between DVD and Blu-Ray? It may just be me, but it appears that they are not much sharper than the DVDs (unlike the DVD vs VHS change) and most of it is marketing.

To me, the refresh rate makes a much bigger difference than the resolution. Most people I know look at me like I'm crazy when I say "I don't really care for HD"

What kind of eyes or monitor do you have when you can't tell the difference between a normal Xvid and 720p x264?

Re: Apple faking 489 to 815 PPI on iPhone 4 ads

#52

Post by tpz »

jerf wrote: post #47
tomjen3 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you actually see the difference between DVD and Blu-Ray? It may just be me, but it appears that they are not much sharper than the DVDs (unlike the DVD vs VHS change) and most of it is marketing.

Be sure to check this chart: http://hd.engadget.com/2006/12/09/1080p-charted-viewing-dist... and compare that to the viewing set up you had. It is very, very, very easy to put yourself in a situation where 1080 is useless. The cutoff for where your 1080 40" TV might as well be a 720 TV is 7 to 8 feet; further away than that and you can't tell the difference between 1080 and 720. At about 12 feet you've lost HD entire…

All true, but worth a brief addition: these viewing distance / screen size / resolution models all assume average adult vision, so if you are one of the folks both lucky and unlucky enough to have above-average vision (or below, for that matter) you should take that into account.

As but one example, the parent's example transition at 7 to 8 feet would occur around 10 feet for me. Above-average vision is great on paper but translates into more expensive displays positioned farther away. :(

Re: Apple faking 489 to 815 PPI on iPhone 4 ads

#53

Post by silvestrov »

Groxx wrote: post #28

Actually, I just realized... for the effect of what they're claiming (pixels smaller than you can see), this is a perfect comparison. Blocks to none. Sure, they're achieving it by bending the rules, but I got the impression that 300dpi played second fiddle to "your eye is unable to distinguish individual pixels." [1] [1] http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/retina-display.html edit: their side-by-side comparison show…

The side-by-side hover-loupe (under "In a word, resolutionary") is very very good at demonstrating the difference.

The loupe uses the image below. You can open them and verify that no cheating has been used. The 3GS image has 2*2 pixel blocks all over. The images don't have subpixel antialiasing (as they have to be viewable on all kinds of monitors), so I expect them to look a tiny bit better IRL.

iPhone 3GS: http://images.apple.com/iphone/features/images/retina-resolu...

iPhone 4: http://images.apple.com/iphone/features/images/retina-resolu...

Try view the images. A truly great difference.

Re: Apple faking 489 to 815 PPI on iPhone 4 ads

#54

Post by ZeroGravitas »

silvestrov wrote: post #53
Groxx wrote: post #28

Actually, I just realized... for the effect of what they're claiming (pixels smaller than you can see), this is a perfect comparison. Blocks to none. Sure, they're achieving it by bending the rules, but I got the impression that 300dpi played second fiddle to "your eye is unable to distinguish individual pixels." [1] [1] http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/retina-display.html edit: their side-by-side comparison show…

The side-by-side hover-loupe (under "In a word, resolutionary") is very very good at demonstrating the difference. The loupe uses the image below. You can open them and verify that no cheating has been used. The 3GS image has 2*2 pixel blocks all over. The images don't have subpixel antialiasing (as they have to be viewable on all kinds of monitors), so I expect them to look a tiny bit better IRL. iPhone 3GS: http://…

A truly great difference if your iPhone was the size of an iPad.

Put them both on the screen and stand far enough back to equalize them with the size of an iPhone held up at a reasonable reading distance. They will both be equally unreadable.

Re: Apple faking 489 to 815 PPI on iPhone 4 ads

#55

Post by mirkules »

VMG wrote: post #51
mirkules wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, the refresh rate makes a much bigger difference than the resolution. Most people I know look at me like I'm crazy when I say "I don't really care for HD"

What kind of eyes or monitor do you have when you can't tell the difference between a normal Xvid and 720p x264?

I didn't say I can't tell the difference. All I meant was at the end of the day, if I watch a soccer game (for example) in "standard" definition versus HD, I still watch the same game without any loss of useful information whatsoever. Why does HD make my life better?
Post reply on HN