New iPad vs iPad 2: Retina display tests

iPad vs iPad 2: Retina display tests

The new iPad sports a 9.7-inch, 2048x1536, 264ppi Retina display, which is twice as dense as the iPad 2's equal sized, 1024x768, 132ppi screen but packs four (4) times as many pixels into the same space. That's exactly what it sounds like -- the new iPad has 4 pixels in the same space the iPad 2 had a 1 pixel.

Icon on an iPad 2 display

Icon on a new iPad Retina display

Theoretically, that means the pixels on the new iPad display are so small they're difficult if not impossible to discern with the naked eye during general use. Hence the marketing name "Retina". It's roughly the same effect as when you compare cheap newspaper or old comic print next to a high end glossy magazine. The information becomes so densely packed that the mechanics disappear and only the content remains. Everything looks sharper, crisper, more solid, and more real. If you're not a trained typographer, photographer, or designer, it's still something your eyes and brains will appreciate even if you can't articulate it.

Instapaper text on an iPad 2 display

Instapaper text on a new iPad Retina display

Now there is one important caveat: For things like fonts and built-in user interface controls, Apple's iOS will handle the scaling automatically. For bitmap graphics, like PNG files in icons or custom user interfaces, designers have to create the new, higher density artwork or iOS will simply render the same lower-resolution image using more pixels. (Think watching standard definition video on a high definition screen).

A regular graphic (1x) will simply be rendered with more (4) pixels per point on a Retina display, unless designers create proper Retina (2x) resources

Still, the original iPad was amazing when it first launched. I called it the iPhone gone IMAX and that's exactly what it felt like. The iPhone's then 480x320 screen just seemed small and cramped by comparison. But then Apple introduced the iPhone 4 and the 960x640 Retina display and everything changed. Suddenly small was sharp and cramped was clear, and while the iPad and even the iPad 2 was still bigger, the display wasn't better. It was quantity but not quality. Seeing and reading and watching on the iPhone was harder but suddenly more relaxing and enjoyable.

Safari text on an iPad 2 screen

Safari text on an new iPad Retina display

Some people have used the metaphor of putting on glasses -- of the Retina screen being so good it's like they can focus for the first time. That's not entirely it though. I have a feeling the Retina display goes deeper than that. It's good enough your brain no longer has to work at filling in details anymore and it can just relax and enjoy. It can just see and read and watch.

Now the iPad has it as well. Once again it's bigger and better. It's not small but it is sharp, not cramped but it is clear.

iBooks text on an iPad 2 display

iBooks text on a new iPad Retina display

For me, it will be hard if not uncomfortable to go back. It will be rough and bumpy and almost clumsy. And given how good the iPad 2 display is, that's a hell of a thing to say. (I'm typing this on a MacBook Air, which has a fairly dense display in its own right, and now I find myself acutely and annoyingly aware of the sub-pixel anti-aliasing.)

The difference between the new iPad and the iPad 2's display isn't as much as an old Standard Definition (SD) TV and a 1080p High Definition (HD) display, because for most people that involved the simultaneously jump from CRT tubes to LCD or Plasma flat panels. But it's more than the jump from 720p to 1080p display. It's like going from iTunes SD movies to iTunes HD movies. Everything is smoother but more textured, cleaner but more detailed.

I remember watching Lord of the Rings in HD for the first time, amazed at how much more there was to see. That's the same feeling I have with the new iPad, watching the Avengers trailer in 1080p (in a window, since 1920x1080 doesn't even fill the new iPad display).

iBooks image on an iPad 2 display

iBooks image on a new iPad Retina display

It's not the Martix's "welcome to the real world" or even Vader's "with my own eyes", but for anyone who cares about image quality, typography, iconography, art, or HD video, it's very much in that geeky vein.

Since it's harder to show the difference than it is to just write about it, I put a macro lens on my iPhone 4S and took some close up images to try an highlight just what that many pixels look like. Holding the new iPad at a distance, you don't see the pixels, of course. You just see the content. That's the whole point.

Apple has made the best panel I've ever seen, and while not everyone will appreciate it, or even care about it, that takes nothing away from the achievement.

I've jotted down some more thoughts in the new iPad forum, so jump in there and let me know what your experience has been with the Retina display.

Rene Ritchie

Editor-in-Chief of iMore, co-host of Iterate, Debug, Review, Vector, and MacBreak Weekly podcasts. Cook, grappler, photon wrangler. Follow him on Twitter and Google+.

More Posts

 

12
loading...
0
loading...
159
loading...
0
loading...

← Previously

Special edition: The new iPad Live! Tonight at 6pm PDT/9pm EDT/1am GMT

Next up →

Apple announces early morning con-call tomorrow, March 19, to discuss cash balance

Reader comments

New iPad vs iPad 2: Retina display tests

19 Comments
Sort by Rating

haha best and saddest trolling ever!
You do know that Apple creates the technology and lets other company Mass produce it right.. if you were being sarcastic i apologize

Errr, in this case, no. Apple provided a desired spec, and asked the manufacturers to figure out how to make it. Apple is the only company on the planet with the market muscle to motivate them to do it, but they figured it out.
You know, it doesn't physically hurt to give credit where credit is due, even when Apple does not get all of it.

No, you're incorrect. Apple did not merely give Samsung a problem statement to solve. Apple created and perfected the design, specifications of materials to be used. Samsung merely fabricated the physical parts. This is why Samsung do not have retina displays for their own devices, yet Apple does--they own the design.
Samsung built them, but did not design or create the technical details behind the physical component. Otherwise Samsung would be using the same screens, and selling them to others too if they wished.

Not necessarily, and I find very hard to believe that Apple, a company with no expertise in screens, would develop a screen that companies with large R&D departments and extensive display expertise could not. Sharp was the first to present a prototype, but Samsung was the one that made it up to Apple specs, so I believe this is really a Samsung project.
The fact that only Apple market those could be a contract requirement, or several other marketing reasons, price or availability for example. Apple does not design batteries, memory or hard-disks. The only component Apple designs is the processor, and it was a high profile acquisition at the time. I don't remember Apple buying any display company recently.

@Carioca You're right, it's very likely that Samsung had a major hand in developing the screen. It might be more accurate to say that they worked together to make it happen though as it's rarely ever as simple as giving a spec and expecting everything to work out magically.
btw, Apple has been adding it's own silicon to batteries for a while and they recently acquired a flash memory company called Anobit. Likely, it was to try and drive down the cost of creating future devices (only to increase their margins of course ;) )

Actually the original poster could be correct. The first batch of ipad hd's have the samsung display, but those manufactured frm Mar.3rd and on either use LG or Sharp displays.

Does any one else other than me think its bs that the ipad doesnt come with earphones for the price they should come with beats by dre

Bickering aside, I'm interested in the effect of the anti-aliasing filter on the new retina display both in natively and in the rendering of third party content. The ant-aliasing filter ,was developed by camera maker to mitigate the effect of jagged diagonals among other things. Sensor manufacers have gone back and forth on the strength of the anti -aliasing filters for years. Some claim that too strong an anti-aliasing kills fine details and believe less is more. This debate is still unresolved.
Given that a full frame sensor is 24mm x 36 mm, the anti-aliasing filter on the new iPad is massive. Various opinions are that the iPads anti aliasing filter is far more sympathetic to text , graphics (hard lines) and less so to photographs and other non linear imagery. Please let me know your thoughts.

I don't know if this true but according what i read on wikipedia Retina Display Just an IPS LCD LED backlit so there's nothing new in it and also in wikipedia this is developed by LG @_@

It works instantly with every computer I plug it into, it has excellent battery life (in the range of 4-6 weeks) and it just works. It’s not laggy like a lot of wireless mice I’ve tried, and it doesn’t require the lengthy install some do also. The range is good and the nanoreceiver sits out of the way in my laptop all the time without having ever snagged or had a problem. None of these are the best thing about this mouse, however.

awesome article plz visit my blog too
i m also writing a blog on apple
The Unofficial Apple Blog. Daily news ranging from iPhone, iPhone apps review,software,mobile to latest news.
Join us Apptec.net, your Apple Community.

Anyone looking to buy an iPad should definitely check out this site: ipaddirect1.mybigcommerce(dot)com/. You’ll save a ton of money, the prices are ridiculous. You’re welcome.