Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tuomas Hämäläinen" data-source="post: 87000" data-attributes="member: 787">It does make sense. This is how Apple have transitioned to retina displays in terms of resolution:iPhone: 320 by 480 -> 640 by 960iPad: 1024 by 768 -> 2048 by 1536MacBook Pro 15-inch: 1440 by 900 -> 2880 by 1800MacBook Pro 13-inch: 1280 by 800 -> 2560 by 1600Each retina display has exactly four times the amount of pixels (and therefore exactly double the PPI) compared to its non-retina predecessor. That makes it relatively painless for developers to optimise their applications to support the higher resolution while non-optimised applications can simply be pixel-doubled - they don't look that flattering on the retina display but can be displayed crisply, pixel-to-pixel, just like on the non-retina display. That is also the reason why Apple can't just arbitrarily put a 1080 by 1920 display into an iPhone, because the scaling factor from the previous resolution is not an integer. Doing so would result in fragmentation of the platform.We're only now starting to get rid of non-retina displays in iPhones with iOS 7 dropping support for iPhone 3GS this autumn. The changes to the OS itself are so profound and require so much effort from the developers, it would be foolish of Apple to introduce a new display resolution into the mix now.</blockquote>

No members online now.

Total: 151 (members: 0, guests: 151)