Quote:
Originally Posted by ficbot
I must be the only one who can't see that much of a difference with the retina. My phone has it and I just don't notice the difference. I have an iPad 2 I got just when the iPad 3 came out, and I regret it. The mini is much smaller and lighter. I only use the full-size one for work now, and while that means it does get use, it was very expensive. And now that Apple has released so many more so quickly, its resale value is negligible. Had I known then what I know now, I would have kept my iPad 1 for work and then just waited for the mini.
|
You are definitely not alone.
Who Sees the World This Way?
In spite of blanket assertions by Retina Display advocates that the difference in display is tremendous and that *everyone* sees it--many people, maybe even most, do not see things the
same way. And there have been both anecdotal and blind comparison tests that show that many people do not see or are unimpressed by the difference.
Now, there is no question that if one zooms in or enlarges the text incredibly on the display, or if one puts the i-device close to their face, etc. that most people, possibly everyone, will notice there is a difference.
Real World Experience
The point, however, is that in real world use, many people, if not most, do not see much of a difference at arm's length, at normal font sizes and zooms, etc. No matter how big a difference some of you see-- it's the reality that visual acuity and display sensitivity vary. Not *everyone* sees things the same way you do-- not *everyone* sees a major difference. It's certainly not the case that *everyone* should prefer the Retina Display or that devices without it are *sub-standard* or laughingly outdated. (The comments are not exactly that sweeping, but they feel that way! And that's why someone felts they had to write, "I must be the only one who can't see that much of a difference with the retina.")
Your Experience is Not Universal--Bald Eagles and 10-point Fonts
I realize that it's hard to believe that others do not see what is obvious to you, but that's simply the case. I have been with people who can spot a bald eagle at a great distance and others who cannot even see that there is something there--and it's hard for both groups to understand what the others can and cannot see.
The other element here is also what one is used to. Give a group of people a long document to read that's in 10-point font size--and then have them gauge the size of regular 12-point text-- it will look ridiculously LARGE. No doubt those of you who now regularly use RD screens are appalled at the older screens. But many others haven't made the transition.
The E-Ink Advocates Make the Same Mistake
Or, Why the Kindle is Not Better than the iPad
Or, for a final, more related example, users of the Kindle and Nook devices repeatedly proclaim a universal truth that LCD or iPad screens produce eye strain and that only e-ink devices are easy on the eyes and good for reading. You can find dozens of threads where Kindle or Nook users bash iPads and any backlit devices as unsuitable for reading. They are 100% certain that everyone else sees the world the way they do. Now, just because they may have gotten tired eyes or headaches using an iPad, and have had a better experience on their Kindles/Nooks, doesn't make their experience universal or their proclamations valid!
Few of us who use iPads or iPhones to read books would agree with them, yet somehow, they cannot believe that anyone could experience the display world and ereading differently from how they do! Of course, few of them adjusted the backlighting or changed the background/text colors of what they were reading--and few of them recognize that the page turn, screen flash on e-ink readers drives many of us to distraction and does produce headaches. At the same time, we need to respect that many people really do have trouble with backlit, bright, color displays for reading, such as those on the iPads, even though it's not our experience at all.
The bottom line?
De gustibus non est disputandum!