4 ms·

Here's a shot from the 3GS: http://images.apple.com/iphone/features/images/retina-resolution-3gs-20100607.jpg http://images.apple.com/iphone/features/images/re

Here's a shot from the 3GS: http://images.apple.com/iphone/features/images/retina-resolution-3gs-20100607.jpg http://images.apple.com/iphone/features/images/retina-resolu... (pixel-doubled) http://i.imgur.com/j2yAN.jpg http://i.imgur.com/j2yAN.jpg (normal size for the curious) And the same from the 4, with actual size pixels: http://images.apple.com/iphone/features/images/retina-resolution-4-20100607.jpg http://images.apple.com/iphone/features/images/retina-resolu... And here's another screenshot, of Mail this time: http://images.apple.com/iphone/features/images/retina-gallery3-large-20100607.jpg http://images.apple.com/iphone/features/images/retina-galler...

ntoshev 16y ago
Thank you for this. Photographing screens is pretty meaningless. If you look at the palm holding the phone in the original post, it is much better visible on the 4 picture than on 3GS, with papillary lines and everything. How can someone claim these pictures allow you to compare the quality of displays is beyond me.
- rbanffy 16y ago
  Like simonsquiff pointed out, it's not the resolution per se, but things you can resolve on one screen you can't on the other. I guess I would have to hold it very close to my face to be able to read most of the NYT home, but there must be people who can read it at a distance.
simonsquiff 16y ago
That's genuinely very very impressive. I think all the web commentary about whether the pixels are visible or not are missing the point. The point is that thinks that were not readable (or resolvable) now are. For instance on the NYT page, on the 3gs screenshot only the main headlines are readable. On the 4 phone, everything is. That's a huge usability improvement. Additionally a number of the stylist elements on the iphone don't look that great at lower resolution but amazing at the higher one. The obvious one is the inset text effect used for the browser header (i.e. the white inset on text),it almost looks like ghosting on the 3gs whilst on the 4 it looks like a crisp inset. The same goes for the inset icons at the bottom. I have to look hard to see pixels on my 3gs; things looking less pixely isn't the news, things being more resolvable is.

ntoshev 16y ago

Thank you for this. Photographing screens is pretty meaningless. If you look at the palm holding the phone in the original post, it is much better visible on the 4 picture than on 3GS, with papillary lines and everything. How can someone claim these pictures allow you to compare the quality of displays is beyond me.

rbanffy 16y ago
Like simonsquiff pointed out, it's not the resolution per se, but things you can resolve on one screen you can't on the other. I guess I would have to hold it very close to my face to be able to read most of the NYT home, but there must be people who can read it at a distance.

simonsquiff 16y ago

That's genuinely very very impressive. I think all the web commentary about whether the pixels are visible or not are missing the point. The point is that thinks that were not readable (or resolvable) now are. For instance on the NYT page, on the 3gs screenshot only the main headlines are readable. On the 4 phone, everything is. That's a huge usability improvement. Additionally a number of the stylist elements on the iphone don't look that great at lower resolution but amazing at the higher one. The obvious one is the inset text effect used for the browser header (i.e. the white inset on text),it almost looks like ghosting on the 3gs whilst on the 4 it looks like a crisp inset. The same goes for the inset icons at the bottom. I have to look hard to see pixels on my 3gs; things looking less pixely isn't the news, things being more resolvable is.