iPad 264 PPI: Time To Treat It Like A Junior High Retainer?

[Ryand123]

Apple released the first retina iPad in March of 2012. It had a ppi of 264.

Obama was in his first term.

Chat GPT wasn't even a twinkle in Open AI's father's eye.

Flo Rida was burning up the Billboard charts.

Charlie Rose and Matt Lauer were highly esteemed journalists.

Yet here we are, two Presidents later, a pandemic later, and every iPad model except the mini is still stuck at 264 ppi like a scratched record endlessly repeating the chorus of Gotye's Somebody That I Used To Know.

And the iPad stands alone in this regard. The first retina iPhone was 326 ppi, now they are around 450 ppi. The first retina Macbook was about 220 ppi, now both Pro models are 254 ppi.

Now it can be argued that other display factors matter more. Like mini LED or OLED. But a bump in ppi can help too. Part of the problem is Steve Jobs did such a brilliant job making the case there was no need to ever go beyond 326 ppi on a phone or 264 ppi on a tablet that I think many still treat that as Gospel. You can't see pixels anyway! But Steve's pitches were maybe 40 percent science and 60 percent salesmanship. He conveniently said there was no point going beyond those ppi's because they were the outer limits of what the technology would allow at the time.

But the benefits of ppi go beyond just the ability to detect pixels. There's still a sharpness advantage to be had even after pixels have become invisible. Time to put 264 ppi to bed, Apple! It's a contemporary of the iPod Shuffle!

 

[Pakaku]

Now it can be argued that other display factors matter more. Like mini LED or OLED. But a bump in ppi can help too. Part of the problem is Steve Jobs did such a brilliant job making the case there was no need to ever go beyond 326 ppi on a phone or 264 ppi on a tablet that I think many still treat that as Gospel. You can't see pixels anyway! But Steve's pitches were maybe 40 percent science and 60 percent salesmanship. He conveniently said there was no point going beyond those ppi's because they were the outer limits of what the technology would allow at the time.

But the benefits of ppi go beyond just the ability to detect pixels. There's still a sharpness advantage to be had even after pixels have become invisible. Time to put 264 ppi to bed, Apple! It's a contemporary of the iPod Shuffle!

I'm gonna go with Steve on this one... if you can't see the individual pixels, it's a lot harder to justify even tighter pixel density. The lack of "sharpness advantage" doesn't really make a difference to me, and I'm in the digital art scene.

There are other factors to it as well, like the processing power it takes to power a bigger screen, and still transform the UI smoothly, refresh the screen quickly, or have a long lasting battery. There's also the concept of how far away the device is expected to be held from your eyes; a phone will be held closer than a tablet, a computer screen, a TV screen... It makes more sense that the iPhone has a higher pixel density than an iPad. I'm not sure what difference it makes to jump from a 220 PPI Macbook screen to 254 PPI, but I doubt it's the same "sharpness advantage" improvement you're thinking

 

[Ryand123]

I'm gonna go with Steve on this one... if you can't see the individual pixels, it's a lot harder to justify even tighter pixel density. The lack of "sharpness advantage" doesn't really make a difference to me, and I'm in the digital art scene.

There are other factors to it as well, like the processing power it takes to power a bigger screen, and still transform the UI smoothly, refresh the screen quickly, or have a long lasting battery. There's also the concept of how far away the device is expected to be held from your eyes; a phone will be held closer than a tablet, a computer screen, a TV screen... It makes more sense that the iPhone has a higher pixel density than an iPad. I'm not sure what difference it makes to jump from a 220 PPI Macbook screen to 254 PPI, but I doubt it's the same "sharpness advantage" improvement you're thinking

Okay but if there is a ppi bump--especially if it's fairly large--in the future I will be sure to stop by here and check comments. Guessing everyone will rave about the improvement after saying for years it made no difference. Apple fans sometimes convince themselves they don't want things they can't have. I remember people STAUNCHLY defending iPhones having only 3.5 inch and 4 inch screens long after Android phones had gotten larger, claiming any screen larger than that on a phone was ridiculous. A similr phenomenon repeated itself when Apple stuck with LCD screens long after Android phones went to OLED. Now Apple is having to ditch the SE because no one wants small phones and few here would want a non-OLED iPhone. We've come full circle.

 

[rui no onna]

I’d love to get 326 ppi particularly now with the More Space display zoom option on iPads with M-series chipsets. It’s something I wish Apple had put on the 2017 iPad Pro 10.5”. That would have given the 10.5” 2732x2048 same as the 12.9”.

That said, I don’t think I’d be willing to take a large battery hit for the extra pixels.

 

[cupcakes2000]

Okay but if there is a ppi bump--especially if it's fairly large--in the future I will be sure to stop by here and check comments. Guessing everyone will rave about the improvement after saying for years it made no difference. Apple fans sometimes convince themselves they don't want things they can't have. I remember people STAUNCHLY defending iPhones having only 3.5 inch and 4 inch screens long after Android phones had gotten larger, claiming any screen larger than that on a phone was ridiculous. A similr phenomenon repeated itself when Apple stuck with LCD screens long after Android phones went to OLED. Now Apple is having to ditch the SE because no one wants small phones and few here would want a non-OLED iPhone. We've come full circle.

Ahh so another thread to start a war. Got it.

 

[FreakinEurekan]

Lots of features I’d be willing to pay for before improving PPI that is already too small for me to see.

 

[sracer]

Lots of features I’d be willing to pay for before improving PPI that is already too small for me to see.

👍 That's because you're just an average human. There are those out there with X-Men super-vision that can spot individual pixels on an iPad Mini's 326 ppi display from 30 feet away!

The Apple tech bloggers who extoll the virtues of the current iPad Pro lineup as having outstanding displays will claim that those screens are a pixelated mess the moment Apple produces an iPad Pro with a higher ppi. 😂🤣 This happens with every advancement. Marketing hyperbole to conjure up FOMO.

Somewhere along the way, Apple lost its way with regard to the iPad. The iPad never had the greatest specs compared to other tablets, but it offered a total package that was greater than the sum of its modest parts. But in order to prevent the iPad from being a commodity product (driven down by price), Apple kept adding features to justify INCREASING the price.

I guess it is why I'm a fan of the 9th gen iPad. It can do significantly more than its place in the lineup might imply.