By 
The Apple vs Samsung trial has already uncovered a few buried nuggets from Apple’s camp, revealing early iPad prototypes that never made it into production. Today, with the Apple vs Samsung trial kicking off in full effect, court docs are giving us details on tablets coming down the pipeline, this time from Samsung.
Looks like ‘ol Sammy is prepping a tablet codenamed the “P10,” and it’s claim to fame will no doubt be its 256 ppi, 2560×1600 super high resolution Retina-like display. It will be interesting to see how Android will handle a resolution higher than 1080p (I’m wondering if things will look stretched out like in Android’s pre-tablet days).
Court docs don’t reveal too much in terms of a release date, citing only a vague 2012 launch. It’s possible Samsung could be announce the P10 during their launch event on August 15th — they did mention something about a new Galaxy — but I’m still placing my bets on a Note 2 unveiling. How do you guys feel about an Android tablet, of this size, with that high of a resolution. Excessive? We’re gonna need a bigger gun- er, better processor.
[TheVerge]
Guys, the term retina for a HD display was an Apple idea. I don’t think it’s right to use Apple’s term for HD display. Same as saying the Roku is AppleTV-like. And this is not directed at you Chris, this is towards the entire community.
AFAIK, Apple hasn’t copyrighted, trademarked or patented the word or term “retina”. Unless the industry adopts a generic term, it’s likely that “retina” will become a de-facto standard when it comes to defining a products display in relation to it’s size, resolution and distance of use.
PS. Retina has nothing to do with “HD”.
See? it’s guys like you that have it all wrong. The iPad Retina is a 2048×1536 resolution. OEM’s will increase the pixel density, and it will still be considered an HD screen. Retina is strictly an Apple term. Matter of fact, the resolution used as “Retina”, has already been classified as QXGA see link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vector_Video_Standards2.svg
Also, as you can see in link, there are further resolution classifications.
iPhone 4/4S “retina” – 960×640 at 326ppi
iPad 3 “retina” – 2048×1536 at 264 ppi
MacBook Pro “retina” – 2880×1800 at 220 ppi
“Retina” is not a resolution, it’s not “HD” and if you were willing to listen instead of just being condescending or if you actually read the Wiki article that image comes from you’d know that QXGA displays have been around for over a decade.
The three separate products with different resolutions, ppi, and screen size makes it just seem like a gimmicky term to me. Does “retina” actually define anything specific? Based on the facts at hand it would appear that no it does not mean anything more than a hi-res display.
Retina does explain something specific. It has to do with the ratio between the ppi and the average distance you hold a device to your face. It is “retina” if at that resolution and that average distance you cannot see individual pixels with your naked Eye. Retina referring to that thing in your eye. Its a ratio thing.
Half gimick and half a specific term that apple made up.
Its all marketing. Who determines how close/far away the display needs to be from your eye and not be able to differentiate individual pixels? Apple? lol
Anyone not Apple: I cant see the individual pixels on my “insert product here” from a typical viewing distance. So I guess it also has a retina display….
Apple: Nonono, if I put my eyelid right on the glass or look at screenshots zoomed in x100 I can see the individual pixels, but with our product you cant see the individual pixels when you hold it at a typical viewing distance. See?
Aslong as I cant see the pixels at a standard use viewing distance, I couldn’t realy care less.
That’s my point……the VGA standard has been around long before the “Retina” phrase. Anything beyond 720P is considered HD.
http://m.gizmodo.com/5926295/your-tv-is-a-retina-display
What? That doesn’t support your point. You literally said Retina=2048×1536=QXGA. That’s wrong.
That’s the basis.
What? You seriously aren’t making any sense.
If you’re realising you’re wrong or made a mistake, be a man and admit it.
If you still don’t get it, I’ll try and explain it in another way if you want?
I understand the concept of pixels that are dense to the point that you can’t see them at a certain viewing distance, thank you. But that’s only one side of the coin.
That’s an ambiguous, albeit larely truthful definition. By posting the resolutions and devices that Apple consider and market as “Retina” I was showing how non-HD and other resolution devices were also considered “Retina” as the display neither has to be HD or QXGA – something you really didn’t seem to grasp when you wrote “Retina has already been classified as QXGA” and “Apple’s term for HD display”.
If you’d just said “let me phrase that better” or “I shouldn’t have said HD as I forgot about the iPhone 4 res” or something I’d have a lot more respect than just trying to fob it off with meaningless statement like “that’s my point” or “that’s the basis” or your latest “That’s only one side of the coin”.
Fack you too.
@nightscout13:disqus: we arent discussing pixel dimension classifications here. what we are discussing is pixel DENSITY. see @mcblue:disqus’s link below
All Apple did was double their current resolutions and slapped on the Retina moniker and with a bit of marketing they’ve suckered in a ton of people into believing it’s magical unicorn pooo. They didn’t even bother to figure out what resolution they should target for some mythical viewing distance, they simply DOUBLED the base resolutions.
No worries, mate and I see you point. Apple coined the phrase “Retina” to describe a display with an extremely high ppi. Only reason I used it in this case was because Apple was first to market with a tablet of that high of resolution.
Once an Android device launches with a ppi that high, we can finally stop calling it “Retina-like” :p
There is an industry standard, but people do not refer to it oddly enough.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vector_Video_Standards2.svg
+1
If you’re talking strictly ppi, there are at least two Android devices that best Apple’s “Retina Display”: the HTC Rezound (342 ppi) and Sony Xperia X (342 ppi).
Er, sorry. Meant to say “once an Android TABLET launches with a ppi that high..”
I could deal with that
What for? It’s not like you’ll be looking at display that size up close your eyes?
Have you seen the “new iPad?” Screen is freakin’ gorgeous. That resolution makes their 3D games look amazing too..
No.
Retina is just another marketing term or brand if you will, just as Intel used “Centrino” which wasn’t just the processor by itself but the combination of Intel chipset, CPU and wireless card.
to sum up some discussions here. Calling a QXGA screen with high pixel density and resolution a “retina” display is like buying a weed trimmer or a sidewalk edger and calling it a Weed Eater.
It may not be a Proper term but is the most recognized term / brand out there so it is used as a descriptor for similar products.
furthermore on topic i would kinda like to see a 12 inch galaxy tab with the front facing speaker grills.
Retina is just a marketing stupidity. It was introduced as “best resolution your eyes can distinguish”. And that is bullshit.
Now is Samsung can manufacture a 11.8″ tablet that is “virtually” the same weight as the current 10.1″ tablet then I will defo buy one.
How I hate the fake term “retina” it is a made up Apple-word for marketing purposes only. It does not actually mean anything…