Receive instant notification of new columns:
Register Now to receive notification of new HDTV Magazine Columns via email as soon as they are published.
Okay, I was determined to maintain the HDTV Almanac as an iPad-Free Zone, but Steve Jobs has forced me to break my resolution. There are many amazing points to pick out of Wednesday’s announcement, but I’m just going to focus on the video part. First, consider these quotes from the iPad promotional video on the Apple Web site:
And finally, from the text on the iPad Web site: “The best way to experience the web, email, photos, and video. Hands down.”
Well, in my opinion it’s “thumbs down” on these typically hyperbolic claims by Apple. Even a momentary consideration of the specifications makes these claims dubious at best. First, Apple gets all excited about the LED backlight and the IPS LCD panel. Hmmm… just about every notebook on the market these days has an LED backlight. There’s nothing amazing there. And IPS stands for “In-Plane Switching”, which is LG’s technology for wider viewing angles on LCD panels. It’s a good technology that has been around for a long time, but it’s hardly cutting edge. A more stunning fact is that the iPad does not have a widescreen display. It is the same 4:3 aspect ratio as your grandmother’s Zenith picture tube TV had. Just about every netbook computer on the market has a 16:9 aspect ratio screen, but not the iPad. To make matters worse, however, the panel only has XGA resolution, which is 1024 by 768 pixels. Guess what? That’s not enough to even show 720p high definition images without scaling them down. And because the panel is not a widescreen, the result will be letterboxed. The best it can do is 1024 by 576, which is barely better than a widescreen standard definition format. And when letterboxed, the image size shrinks from 10 inches diagonal (actually, it’s just 9.7 inches) to a mere 8.9 inches. How does watching a less-than-high definition 8.9 inch diagonal video image rate as “the best movie-watching experience ever“? Somehow, I would have picked a 1080p projector with a 100-inch screen and a 7.1 surround sound system in a home theater installation, or at least a 50-inch LCD or plasma flat screen HDTV. I don’t think a device like the iPad would ever occur to me. Am I all wrong on this? Will you be trading your HDTV for an iPad as soon as you can? Let me know at alfred@hdtvprofessor.com.
Posted by Alfred Poor, January 29, 2010 5:48 AM
Reader Commentary Alfred - I agree they're overhyping, but you have to understand they're coming from a world of iPhones and iPods so this is a huge improvement over that. However I just noticed you can get a Dell Mini netbook with a 1366x768 widescreen display. I just don't think the iPad will be a runaway hit. It's too big to replace a smart phone/iPhone and it's too small to replace a full sized laptop. It's great as a portable movie viewer but how often do you need one of those?... Am I all wrong on this? Not hardly! Any new display with the potential for viewing just about anything that can't support high-def widescreen these days is old technology. Let's get with the program, Apple. :shock:... Alfred, Alfred, Alfred. > Am I all wrong on this? < First off, no, I don't think you got it wrong on the hype angle at all. It's totally bloated beyond all believability. But that's what PR people seem to be paid to spin these days. The only slack I'll cut them is the point that akirby made: they're coming from a reference base that's quite anemic. The size and resolution of the new iPad is a big win over the iPhone and iPod Touch. So if that's what you're using for comparison, sure. > A more stunning fact is that the iPad does not have a widescreen display. It is the same 4:3 aspect ratio as your grandmother’s Zenith picture tube TV had. Just about every netbook computer on the market has a 16:9 aspect ratio screen, but not the iPad. < I had the same reaction... Videograbber - the case couldn't be made any better. I will add that as an iPhone user, I too will be slow to add this to my tool set, simply because I am hooked into the case where I can put a laptop into my pocket. Yeah, the iphone screen is low res and small, but it is one heck of a beautiful image 15" from my eyes. One context where I do see the iPad, is for my bed bound elderly mother. I wanted to get an iPhone but elderly or not, she still has nails and had trouble with the touch display. I can see the bigger keypad being better for her. She then can take a mountain of paper notes and address books, DVD's, books, etc. and have them all at hand. If she can handle the weight. For me, I see it as the kitchen dinette table conversation web engine, that I can travel with. Since the iphone, we are constantly looking everything up. There was alot of advertiseing of web during TV, but that really blows the concentration on and flow of the show. But in a conversation where a few ... One thing I left out of my previous response was your claim that, > The best it can do is 1024 by 576, which is barely better than a widescreen standard definition format. < I'll contradict you on technical grounds here. That's 71% better than the very best SD format (SuperBit DVD), and I wouldn't consider almost twice as many pixels to be "barely better". If that were the case, then I guess 1080p, which has "only" twice as many pixels, is barely better than 720p? Plasma panels, which showed 850x480p (ED displays), were barely better than widescreen SD, but they sure looked a lot better. Especially at a distance. The lowly iPad kicks them in the pants. :) Plus, they're less likely to cause hernias when carried around. ;) - Tim... I am in agreement with Alfred. I should clarify first that I love Apple's products, being the proud owner of a MacBook Pro, an Apple TV, 2 iPhone's, an iPod Touch and numerous iPods over the years. I won't be buying an iPad, but that shouldn't come as a surprise given my geek/tech nature. I really don't need a device in between my laptop (which I always have with me) and my iPhone. Sure, it's very cool. And perhaps even innovative, especially given the price. It has some very interesting applications and good potential in certain areas ... but with respect to video? I'll pass. That shouldn't come as a surprise either. And I don't expect many on this particular forum will disagree. - Shane Sturgeon... Tim, we agree on the facts; it's just the interpretation of where we differ. And even then we're not far apart. I will say that EDTV -- 850 by 480 -- is in fact wide standard definition TV. It looked much better because it used physical pixels (as opposed to the virtual pixels on a CRT) and with a digital source like a DVD, it was much sharper than any broadcast CRT could achieve. However, the widescreen format of the iPad has a pixel count that is 144% of EDTV. Half empty or half full? Reasonable people can take either side. But I can't accept that it's as good as high definition, or that scaling down a high def image to fit it is good for the image quality. Alfred... > when letterboxed, the image size shrinks from 10 inches diagonal (actually, it’s just 9.7 inches) to a mere 8.9 inches. < > ...at least a 50-inch LCD or plasma flat screen HDTV < One last thing I need to point out, Alfred, is that as ridiculous as it may seem, it is entirely possible that a 9" diagonal display, that you're holding in your hands, could actually provide a more detailed and higher resolution experience than the 50-inch diagonal plasma screen you postulated... if it were located a fairly typical 12' away. If you're holding the iPad a foot away, the plasma would have to be no more than 5.5' away, for it to subtend the same viewing angle. And most aren't watched from that close. Even accounting for the 'terrible impairment' of the limited 1024x576 rez for widescreen on the iPad, if your 50" full 1280x720... Alfred, > ...with a digital source like a DVD, it was much sharper than any broadcast CRT could achieve. However, the widescreen format of the iPad has a pixel count that is 144% of EDTV. < I thought that EDTV was a display technology. I wasn't aware there was a transport mechanism that recorded consumer content in that format. The DVD sources you refer to were actually 720x480, and frankly that 720 h-rez was an exaggeration, because all DVDs were spatially filtered to reduce detail, so that temporal compression didn't result in excessive MPEG artifacting. That's why people bought Superbit-DVDs, because they had less horizontal filtering applied, and thus a more detailed image. To achieve that (higher bit budgets) they sacrificed the Extras on a disc. That's all that Superbit did. So scaling the source 720 rez up to 850 in a display buys you nothing at all in terms of actual resolution gain. And that's why the accurate number is 71%, and... Taking a different tack... One must remember the audience! These are the same folks that willingly listen to MP3 on their iPods (and why I don’t own one). Apple figures if they’re already willing to accept dumbed down audio, whatever they give them for video will suffice. After all, they’ve already sold how many iPods and iPhones? None of which has anything to do with high-fidelity/high-definition. I’ve never been willing to spend lots and lots of money on my AV systems, but have usually ended up with something much better than the “all right.” Apple doesn’t even aim for “all right”, and they’ll get away with it. Obviously, I don’t plan to buy an iPad either. Needless to say, if you want to have high quality reproduction in both audio and video, you’re in a small minority any more. The best you can hope for is the fact that minority doesn’t shrink to the point the makers of equipment can no longer stay in business. ...a... More from Alfred Poor
More in Category: Mobile HDTV
About Alfred PoorAlfred Poor is a well-known display industry expert, who writes the daily HDTV Almanac. He wrote for PC Magazine for more than 20 years, and now is focusing on the home entertainment and home networking markets. |
advertisement
Local Guides
Authors
Categories
Other Recent Discussion
advertisement
|
||||||||
© 1998 - 2010 HDTV Magazine, Ltd.
Home |
Advertise |
Contact Us |
About HDTV Magazine |
Help |
RSS Feeds
v3.0
