Full article here.
Electonista reports, “A handful of discoveries on Saturday may have all but confirmed suspicions of a new iPad with a Retina Display. Both Arizona State University researcher Rafeed Chaudhury and mobile app writer Steve Troughton-Smith found images in both the current iBooks 1.2 and its 1.1 predecessor showing background and bookmark images that fit a “2X” iPad resolution that doesn’t exist before. The wood tile image (below) is 1,536 pixels wide, twice the width of the iPad’s screen, and by extension points to a 2048×1536 display on the future Apple tablet.”
Read more in the full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Readers “Manny S.” and “Jax44” for the heads up.]
WiFi model will keep current screen.
3G-GPS model will have new screen and will be subsidized.
I bought a 3G-GPS model, but never used the data plan, I wanted the GPS. My above scheme would make me sad, oh well. I wish Apple could tether the iPad to the iPhone so I could get the WiFi version and not miss out on GPS, or better yet include GPS in the WiFi version. My $ .02
@cbstottle Agreed!!!
Or just open the Bluetooth stack to allow add on gps units. The only reason I jail broke my iPod touch was to allow my gps mouse to talk to it and get sat nav. Works brilliantly. The only thing I want is an open Bluetooth stack in iOS 4.3.
And yes Mr Jobs I understand that this would decrease battery life, hence the power cable in my car.
A doubling of pixels in both dimensions makes complete sense, but the cost of manufacturing such a high-res multitouch screen can’t be cheap. As we know Apple’s strategy has been to replace older models with newer ones at the same price point or even less, I’ll wait to see it before I believe it.
Sounds good. The iPad and all the Mac line—desktops and portables—should have these high-res displays along with gorilla glass.
Non-tempered glass should be done away with on the next refresh cycle.
If Apple can offer a 10 inch screen at 2048 × 1536 for $499, they will completely obliterate the competition. Even at $599, it would be pretty amazing.
But is such a screen even possible in that price range?
“I wish Apple could tether the iPad to the iPhone so I could get the WiFi version…”
It’s maddening. Works so perfectly on the Mac.
When I leave home with my WiFi-only iPad it’s like a glorified ebook reader : (
This will change. Give it time.
Interesting idea.
I still think a smaller iPad doesn’t make sense — at least for me.
If I’m not carrying anything with me, I still have my iPhone. And if I am carrying something with me an “8-1/2 x 11″” iPad is always the perfect size to tag along.
On the other hand, if there are people who want a smaller iPad, this would be the way to do it.
1. Shrink the existing 1024×768 screen to about 6-7″ with al pixels intact. iPad nano, or something.
2. Bring out the iPad 2 (at the same size, but a slightly larger screen and a slightly smaller bezel), using a resolution of 2048×1536.
1. Shrink the existing 1024×768 screen to about 6-7″ with al pixels intact. iPad nano, or something.
Done. The iPod Touch with its Retina Display is almost exactly that.
The 2048×1536 display will only be available on the new IPad hardwired for power and ethernet. It’s the sacrifice that must be paid for the visual ecstasy.
@German Reader, but at 3.5″ the screen still only supports “smartphone” UI conventions.
I would argue that at about paperback-size, it could support iPad UI conventions.
I only have room in my life for 2 sizes of mobile objects:
1. “pocketable” things (phones, etc),
2. “magazine” size things (iPads, Mackbooks, Notebooks),
But, there are lots of people — like my wife — who have a third category of “space” in their lives for portable objects.
Maybe call it “purseable”.
There’s a reason paperback books have been a hit over the years. This third category really does exist in the real world. It’s just a matter of if Apple can make it work, and if they chose to exploit it.
I should clarify that by “Notebooks” I meant real, paper pads to make notes on : )
iPad screen is already beautifully sharp. Any increase in resolution would be heavenly. Our family desperately needs another one anyway.
disposableidentity: but at 3.5″ the screen still only supports “smartphone” UI conventions.
I would argue that at about paperback-size, it could support iPad UI conventions.
I doubt that, and Jobs apparently sees it the same way – and most likely he has actually tried different sizes before finally deciding against the smaller sizes.
First of all: HA! This is to the ones who said a Retina iPad would be impractical. Sure, 326ppi would be impractical, but does Apple really need to jump from 130ppi to 326ppi in one generation?
@cbstolle “WiFi model will keep current screen.
3G-GPS model will have new screen and will be subsidized.”
That makes no sense. Apple simply doesn’t work that way.
@disposableidentity
No 7″ iPad. That would fragment the range the same way an iPhone nano would. Steve already said no.
@German Reader
Do you remember when Mr. Jobs was opposed to video on the iPod? He stated it would not happen.
@silverhawk
Do you remember when Mr. Jobs was opposed to an iPhone nano? He stated it would not happen.
Oh yeah, it didn’t
I don’t see this as “all but confirming” anything. If the previous (not just latest) version of iBooks app also had “2x” images, why is the same type of thing NOT seen in other recent Apple apps? Why is it ONLY for the bookmark image and the background image, and NOT for other graphical elements in the iBooks app?
This type of screen upgrade may be Apple’s eventual plan for iPad, and there are probably internal iPad prototypes in the “secret lab” that have such a doubled screen resolution. Apple can afford a long and exhaustive testing process for iPad (unlike the competition just throwing half-baked stuff out there), and they are probably already working on iPad 3.0. Apple may have been using the iBooks app for testing purposes; it would be a good choice, since it renders a lot of text and graphics in displaying its media content.
I just don’t see it happening for “iPad 2” (although I’d love to be wrong and see iPad get some crazy cool screen). It will no doubt happen eventually.
Apple plays to win. Even if their margins are slightly hurt next year it will put them so far ahead of the competition that their dominance will be assured for the forseeable future in the tablet market.
The iPad will continue iPod like dominance.
But they won’t call it iPad 2. It’ll just be iPad (2nd generation) like iPods and Apple TV.
@ Manbearpig
iPad will “continue iPod like dominance” in 2011 whether it has a “Retina Display” or not. Heck, even the current first gen iPad would be sufficient to dominate the current competition…
And “iPad 2” is a logical product name. The current iPhone is called iPhone 4, and it was preceded by iPhone 3G and iPhone 3GS. iPods had all sorts of suffix names, such as mini, photo, nano, 5G, classic, touch, etc. It was not just called “iPod.”
A retina high res display model and one using current res would allow Apple to price differentiate and the current generation can be reduced and sell for $299.
Say goodbye to so called poor copy-cats.
It’s an advantage for the iPad that the iPhone presents more pixels per inch, because when you run an iPhone app on an iPad it scales larger. Also, there’s a greater need for Retina Display on an iPhone because the human eye needs more help resolving its smaller image.
Apple should take the resources that might go to an iPad Retina Display and spend them on some other improvement.
The iPhone is the only Apple product that has a # attached, I think.
It’ll be doubled resolution and will be called iPad.
Believe.
All I want in the iPad 2 (beyond what it has now) is front camera.
All the rest… Just a bonus to me.
Rear camera
Retina display
SD slot
Lighter/slimmer
Etc
But if the retina display is true on the iPad 2…. Truly game over.
The SD slot makes sense with a double resolution screen. To take advantage of all those pixels it will be nice to quickly and directly transfer your high quality photos.