iPhone 4 Retina Display Faked By Steve Jobs

Mobile 265 Views
Retina Display Faked-1

Grew up back East, got sick of the cold and headed West. Since I was small I have been pushing buttons - both electronic and human. With an insatiable need for tech I thought "why not start a blog focusing on technology, and use my dislikes and likes to post on gadgets."

14 Comments to iPhone 4 Retina Display Faked By Steve Jobs

  1. Apple is shit and fools you all the time. All the fanboys struggle like hell to tell all how good apple is.

  2. First. George is not good at math. His 2x is actually 4x and his 4x is
    actually 8x. Neither are you, 3 is not a number that pops up in a series
    of multiples of 2. And duh, they are exagerating but they do it to
    simulate the effect, not to show an actual comparison. When the screen
    is as dense as it is, you wont be able to discern ANY individual pixel,
    so the image will (to the human eye) be perfectly sharp. That's why they
    show it that way.

  3. witness of things

    Ok, You obviously hadn't noticed Apple set the bar.
    Technically ole LCD is obsolete before it's perfected.
    Now it's will be a refresh rate arms race in the next five years.
    Notice cable tv can't handle that resolution but our Internet tv can like roku, apple tv or google tv.
    I've been lucky enough to be apart of cox cables “cox coaster” and it's garbage. So why are the putting out their own version when It's competition to their cable?
    Retina is coming, blu ray LCD will fall.
    Then the Jews will face total eradication from muslim brotherhood in egypt , and so will began the end of days!

  4. What element of it is even remotely mediocre? Apple defined the word 'smartphone' when they released the first iPhone. Most of the time, people don't want more features (37 Signals). They want something that looks, feels, and behaves superbly.

    Either that, or I'm a blind idiot in a frenzy.

  5. Michael Phillips

    What they've actually achieved? Are we talking about producing mediocre smartphones, or leading a bunch of idiots into a consumerist frenzy every time they add another trendy and aesthetically pleasing, but overall lackluster gadget to their repertoire?

  6. Blah blah blah… Do you realise how that text will look on a device that is in your hand, when a character is less than half a centimetre high?

    Instead of criticizing what they have shown, why not look at what they have actually achieved?

  7. Smarter than you

    First. George is not good at math. His 2x is actually 4x and his 4x is actually 8x. Neither are you, 3 is not a number that pops up in a series of multiples of 2. And duh, they are exagerating but they do it to simulate the effect, not to show an actual comparison. When the screen is as dense as it is, you wont be able to discern ANY individual pixel, so the image will (to the human eye) be perfectly sharp. That's why they show it that way.

  8. What element of it is even remotely mediocre? Apple defined the word 'smartphone' when they released the first iPhone. Most of the time, people don't want more features (37 Signals). They want something that looks, feels, and behaves superbly.

    Either that, or I'm a blind idiot in a frenzy.

  9. Michael Phillips

    What they've actually achieved? Are we talking about producing mediocre smartphones, or leading a bunch of idiots into a consumerist frenzy every time they add another trendy and aesthetically pleasing, but overall lackluster gadget to their repertoire?

  10. Blah blah blah… Do you realise how that text will look on a device that is in your hand, when a character is less than half a centimetre high?

    Instead of criticizing what they have shown, why not look at what they have actually achieved?

  11. Smarter than you

    First. George is not good at math. His 2x is actually 4x and his 4x is actually 8x. Neither are you, 3 is not a number that pops up in a series of multiples of 2. And duh, they are exagerating but they do it to simulate the effect, not to show an actual comparison. When the screen is as dense as it is, you wont be able to discern ANY individual pixel, so the image will (to the human eye) be perfectly sharp. That's why they show it that way.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>