Comments on: iPad 2nd Generation Adding Retina Display and 128GB of Storage, Wall Street Analyst Says

By: Tudor

Tudor — Tue, 07 Jun 2011 12:10:00 +0000

Who are those “analysts”? Is this an eufemistic for people who like anal pleasures? Who are the clairvoyants and the prophets who tell and write this shit? Apple 7 inch tablets, USBs, ……. guys, I dont know what do you do for a living but if you gain money writting such shit then the society has a huge problem. “Ticonderoga Securities”? Is this the prison where your moms are behind bars for stealing vegetables from the market?

By: Tudor

Tudor — Tue, 07 Jun 2011 12:10:00 +0000

By: Geojungle

Geojungle — Sun, 27 Mar 2011 07:22:00 +0000

I confirm this I bought a ipad 128GB in China last month

By: Mao_Junior

Mao_Junior — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 13:48:00 +0000

Ahhh so!

By: Matthew Gallea

Matthew Gallea — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 00:52:25 +0000

Retina is not 960×640, it is at least 300ppi (pixels per inch)

By: Scot

Scot — Fri, 07 Jan 2011 19:37:23 +0000

A $2000 gaming computer does NOT require much processing power to drive a 1920×1080 display at 60fps. It requires a LOT of processing power to render 3D graphics at 1920x1080x24bitx60fps.

2D graphics, which is what we’re talking about here, is essentially very old technology.

I’m not sure about processing power required to decode h.264, but the video stream would be decoded to it’s original size and then you’d be looking at essentially an upscale filter to process the resultant stream.

By: gershan69

gershan69 — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 05:26:30 +0000

Personally, I’d prefer a bigger 15.5″ screen tablet then a smaller 7″ tablet. A tablet with the screen size of a small laptop would be better for looking at photos, or as a comicbook e-reader, etc., but I’m sure the technology to make a acceptably small battery to run a large screen like that for more then a few hours isn’t there yet.

By: Salman Ahmed

Salman Ahmed — Mon, 03 Jan 2011 09:13:06 +0000

retina display is 360 ppi. so the iphone and ipod touch can only accommodate 960×640. the ipad will be more than that.

By: Wuss

Wuss — Sun, 02 Jan 2011 09:19:17 +0000

I have an iPad and my first and foremost complaint is that it’s not neccesarily too big, but it’s too heavy, which is attributed partially to it’s 9″ size.

I’ve also played with a samsung Galaxy Tab, and I will say that 7″ is every bit as usable as 9″, since the main issue at hand is readable resolution, not physical size. Tab is higher resolution, and even at 7″ tablets 1:1, text is readable and crisp. Not to mention it’s significantly lighter and portable. The iPad just doesn’t quite hit the “in between my laptop and phone” mark Jobs was trying to sell. It pretty much demands as much attention to carry around and manage as my netbook. At 7″, it’s forgettable… I can throw it in the front pocket of my bookbag, or even a large clothing pocket, and jsut go.

By: Wuss

Wuss — Sun, 02 Jan 2011 09:16:00 +0000

1. Steve Jobs has been quoted as specficially saying that the 7inch form factor is basically lame, and denounced the iPad ever going 7 inches. Then again, they spent hundreds of millions of dollars in marketing over 2 decades telling us intel processors suck… and you know how that went.

2. Assuming Steve Jobs is correct about Steve Jobs and the iPad stays 9″, there will be no Retina display. Even IF they could find some SoC/cpu/gpu combination that could drive that insanely high resolution for basic display purposes, Apple has an entire library of third party applications and media content that just is not designed for that resolution.

And if a 2 thousand dollar gaming computer tediously runs 1920×1080 at 60fps+, try a mobile CPU/GPU at a HIGHER resolution at any sort of playable frame rate. Yeah right.

By: Stankdank

Stankdank — Fri, 31 Dec 2010 19:22:51 +0000

of course its going to have to have more than 1024×768 to be retina thats kinda the point.

By: Jeffrey Roppel

Jeffrey Roppel — Wed, 29 Dec 2010 06:30:21 +0000

Guys, I highly doubt that Apple Inc. would make those changes to the iPad! I was just doing the simple math, a 7″ screen would likely be exactly four times the area of a 3.5″ screen and a 1920-by-1280 pixel resolution is exactly four times the pixels of the 960-by-640 iPhone 4/iPod Touch (4th Generation) display. So in other words regarding aspect ratios, if a 7″ iPad (2nd Generation) had the same exact 326 ppi retina display that the iPhone 4/iPod Touch (4th Generation) had then the iPad (2nd Generation) would indeed have a resolution of 1920-by-1280 pixels. Personally I know nothing about aspect ratios.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Wed, 29 Dec 2010 05:26:38 +0000

Apple is not lowering the resolution like you mentioned, because Retina display is defined in terms of PPI or pixels per inch, not a predetermined Resolution. That 960×640 number you mentioned is just the resolution of the iphone, not the measure of a retina display.

By: Alex

Alex — Tue, 28 Dec 2010 16:51:15 +0000

No, the iPad screen size is larger then the iPhone or iPod touch screen size so it’s going to have a better screen than the current one on the iPad now called the retina display.

By: Zac

Zac — Tue, 28 Dec 2010 00:39:38 +0000

Does it really matter? It will when they make a third generation and it will probably run osx then commex can hack it to run windows so it is USEFUL thumbs down if you want but it is useless, I know because I have one!

By: pobes

pobes — Tue, 21 Dec 2010 05:21:45 +0000

Why would they make the iPad smaller, one of my favorite aspects is the big display. Plus for on screen typing, I’d rather have a larger keyboard to type on.

By: Eman

Eman — Mon, 20 Dec 2010 05:00:10 +0000

I think they r going to take the new Mac book air cut the keys off and slap a retina display on there. 1.4 ghz core 2 duo processer 2gigs of ram 128gb of storage 12 mp rear facing camara same look and feel as the iPhone 4 I would buy one

By: JT

JT — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 15:24:11 +0000

Hoping for a USB port. How likely is that?
Thanks,

By: Doug

Doug — Wed, 15 Dec 2010 18:49:24 +0000

A 9.6 inch ipad with Retina display would have a resolution of 2528×1896. I don’t see a reason to pay for a 9.6 inch screen that has more than double the resolution of my 55″ TV.

By: Singapura

Singapura — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 06:52:21 +0000

My prediction would be, no retina because the processor wouldn’t be able to handle it properly, 2 versions with 64 GB or 128GB storage, 1.5Ghz processor, 1GB memory, 2 dock connectors, 1 5Mp camera (front facing)

By: dav ipppety

dav ipppety — Sun, 28 Nov 2010 19:57:23 +0000

a whole lot of Retina talk… bores!

By: yoda

yoda — Sat, 27 Nov 2010 20:05:33 +0000

retina display = 326 pixels per inch

I’d expect this display to be 1920 X 1080

By: Tyler

Tyler — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 17:05:10 +0000

No, Retina is 300 + ppi, not 960 x 640. Larger display, larger the pixel count. Retina is based on pixels per inch.

By: Joe

Joe — Sun, 07 Nov 2010 00:20:55 +0000

That retina resolution is based on an iPhone-sized screen, not a 10 in one. A retina display on the iPad would be well above 1024 x 768.

By: J Sherrier

J Sherrier — Mon, 25 Oct 2010 05:03:49 +0000

What about the rendering the already existing app format? I mean there are some applications that I see on my iphone 4 that are all pixilated because they are blown up from their 320×480 small 160 ppi to the 326 ppi “retina” display. The same method could be used on the 2nd gen’ ipad of any screen size, just render the real time image(s) larger. Apple never ceases to push everyones expectations.

By: Cliffx71

Cliffx71 — Sat, 23 Oct 2010 06:05:46 +0000

Ppimath correctly stated a 7″ version of the iPad that maintains the aspect ratio of the original iPad and the 326ppi density of the iPhone 4 would have a resolution of 1920×1440, vertically in excess of True HD. Apple made the iPad that aspect ratio for a reason. Apple doesn’t see 1920×1080 an optimal resolution for any electronic device wherein as Pc display manufacturer pretty much stopped at 1920×1080 as far as LCD’s are concerned..

By: Jeffrey Roppel

Jeffrey Roppel — Fri, 15 Oct 2010 03:29:47 +0000

Lol, I think you guys might have it all wrong. If the iPhone 4/iPod Touch (4th Generation) both have 3.5″ “Retina Display” screens at 326 ppi, then a 7″ iPad (2nd Generation) at the same 326 ppi would have a higher than 1080p resolution of 1920-by-1280 pixels. And you could watch full 1080p video content, also probably on YouTube as well.

By: Jonnyjim

Jonnyjim — Wed, 13 Oct 2010 20:02:17 +0000

Hope it comes for holiday season. That would be nice

By: bemymonkey

bemymonkey — Sat, 09 Oct 2010 07:18:35 +0000

So you’re saying that increasing CPU speed will help with stability? Very unlikely…

By: Malachie

Malachie — Sat, 09 Oct 2010 02:33:43 +0000

Yeah I got it. The magnificent Retina Display: on the iPhone 4 and iPod touch 4th the display looks sharp, vibrant, deep, like Steve himself mentioned, “once you use Retina, you can’t go back!” it is covered by Alluminoscate. The image density is just intense and more than perfect for the iPad. Right now, the iPhone 4′s screen when shut off is darker than the iPad’s. The iMac is gorgeous, so as iPhones and iPods. What about iPad!

By: Malachie

Malachie — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 22:16:37 +0000

A new iPad will be so interesting. 512mb of RAM, running at 1.2 GHz (sometimes the current iPad crashes on hard tasks), longer battery life, front facing and rear cameras, FaceTime video call, weight loss, 128GB of storage, second USB port. Display? Updated just a bit or a lot!

By: ImperfectLink

ImperfectLink — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 18:35:14 +0000

512mbRAM wouldn’t be too crazy either. Basically a Rev.B or what the iPad was originally supposed to be.

By: ImperfectLink

ImperfectLink — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 18:33:12 +0000

It might be a little early to bump up the specs in the iPad too much. It would create too much friction with the early adopters and people only just getting on the bandwagon due to alleviated stock. I’m going to go with conservative and bet my two cents on a camera, capacity bump on the bottom (maybe just dropping to 2 models), and maybe a longer battery life if they managed to take the same SOC (A4) to a finer lithography.

By: ppiMath

ppiMath — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 04:22:19 +0000

But with a 7-some inch retina display, we are looking at 1920 x 1440, or 1920 x 1080, resolution, depending on which aspect ratio Apple would choose on the device. A dual core Cortex could possibly handle that…

By: Dr Doppio

Dr Doppio — Fri, 08 Oct 2010 03:34:54 +0000

If they could squeeze 1280×800 into a 7 inch diagonal display I’d be mightily impressed, but they won’t. Existing apps are a major selling point for Apple, and they only work on 320×480 or double that (plus some small margin). A 7 inch screen at 1024×768 is the likeliest IMO, if there is any desire to change an already winning format at all.

As for Retina Display (i.e. same pixel density, 326 ppi) — not gonna happen in the next two years.

By: Crapmail

Crapmail — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 21:30:34 +0000

No way they’ll put such a resolution on a 1GHz tablet, event if it’s dual core.
The hardware is quite powerful, but I doubt it’ll be able to push that many pixels. And if they do, the developers will have to redo the iPad apps to support the new resolution and that’s also a big no for now…
My guess – same screen, same resolution, 1Ghz Cortex A9 dual core, maybe that newer PowerVR graphics card that the Galaxy S has, 512mb RAM (no more), front facing camera only (enough for facetime, rear camera for the next model).
I only hope that they’ll follow RIM and stuff 1GB of RAM in there, but seeing how it’s Apple, they’ll just keep it for the next model.

The inclusion of microUSB on ATV was curious, it’s certainly smaller and more convient that apple’s, but i doubt they’ll throw away the revenue from accessories, so it stays.

By: PC

PC — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 20:57:23 +0000

Please correct misspelling in the headline

By: bemymonkey

bemymonkey — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 18:39:32 +0000

It’s insanely high, of course, but that’s exactly what makes it appealing. I’m guessing we’re looking at something along the lines of 2560*1920… one can only hope.

By: Simon Stewart

Simon Stewart — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 18:36:36 +0000

Has anyone thought about the resolution required for a 9 inch plus screen to have a 326dpi pixel density???

By: Fred Falcone

Fred Falcone — Thu, 07 Oct 2010 18:21:24 +0000

Or even one at 7 inches would work!