ORTUS, a collaborative venture between Casio and Toppan Printing, announced the Hyper Amorphous Silicon TFT (HAST) display today in Japan. The company claims it’s up to 30 per cent brighter than other TFT displays.
The new display is reportedly capable of producing 16.8 million colours and has a viewing angle of 160 degrees. But if the Retina Display, as Apple claims, is pushing up against the threshold for the human eye, is ORTUS’s added pixel density really that important? I’m reserving judgment until I can watch The Dark Knight on the thing. [CrunchGear]
H
Tuesday, October 26, 2010 at 7:47 AMIt wasn’t too long ago when people were saying you can’t see much improvement past 30 FPS too.
Pork Chop
Tuesday, October 26, 2010 at 8:16 AMAnd I still clearly remember the press release for one of Apple’s monitors. About 10 years ago there was something saying Appl’e engineers had worked out that the perfect resolution for text was 100 ppi
I reckon we could go to 600 pip. So that you can’t even see pixel when you hold as close as you can to your eyes. The retina display is awesome. I’d love to see them do better though
olearymo
Tuesday, October 26, 2010 at 10:06 AMOH. MY. GOD. They have achieved beyond Retina(TM) Display technology!!!
Surely everyone will now buy whatever this is on? Oh, hang on… there’s no magic in it. Oh, not worth it then. The Retina display is magical and revolutionary, you see.
Ah well.
matt
Tuesday, October 26, 2010 at 10:46 AMlol yeah… I like it how they don’t bat an eyelid when millions of androids come out at 800×480. BUT THEN! as soon as apple releases one that is 960×640 OH!!! suddenly that is the be all and end all! and you could never need anything more!!
I thought when people were cutting through the latest batch of Steve jobs BS, it came out that it was only ‘as much as you’d need’ if you held it like 1m away from you. so there is room for more.
also, anyone who said there isn’t much improvement over 30fps is full of shit, probably trying to justify some limitation, a recent survey found that gamers don’t care about 60vs30 as a selling point, but it is DEFINITELY noticeable.
but there is an absolute limit, our eyes aren’t evolving that quickly, 60FPS looks good at a casual glance, and 100FPS is really when you can’t tell the difference.
the same will be true for res.
G
Tuesday, October 26, 2010 at 4:35 PMwhich android phones had 960×640 screens? esp that sold in the millions :S
if they were out there, surely android is moving backwards then – cos my android had much less resolution, as does all my friends, and friends of friends…. so i’d be interested to know of this mystical phone you speak of…
olearymo
Tuesday, October 26, 2010 at 5:39 PMG, he said millions of Android phones with 800×480, not 960×640. Nothing mystical there, except the mystery of where you learned to read.
Simon Reidy
Thursday, October 28, 2010 at 5:04 PMThere’s a perfectly valid reason that Apple went with the 960×640 resolution. It wasn’t just a “we have more pixels than you move”, bur rather an exact 4x increase in resolution over previous models. This means that older apps scale perfectly as there’s no uneven pixel interpolation.