3 ms·

I just checked my Google Analytics. I have (in my personal blog) 1 visit with this screen resolution, browser Internet Explorer. Then I checked one of my job's

I just checked my Google Analytics. I have (in my personal blog) 1 visit with this screen resolution, browser Internet Explorer. Then I checked one of my job's biggest sites (Apple related), 6 visits, Opera and IE. Checked a smaller site... Added Chrome to the mix. TL;DR: The screen resolution argument is quite crapish.

RBerenguel 15y ago
Btw, checked and found some "Safaries" - 535.8+ with a screen resolution of 1024x600 (operating system version not set, some with Flash support...)
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- mappu 15y ago
  My beta-channel Chrome is 535.19 today, so i don't think that's particularly unusual. (Assuming Webkit versioning is Major.Minor and not decimal)
woobar 15y ago
Same here - 12 visits with Chrome for Windows last month with this resolution
recoiledsnake 15y ago
If the visits are from Apple's block of IPs, the argument is not really crapish. It can be that Apple employees are trolling Ars, but there's a better chance they are testing pre-release devices.
- RBerenguel 15y ago
  They affirm there are very few devices with this resolution. My GA data (and others) disagrees with this. As for the IP range, I think this makes it more legit. But I'd love Apple employees to troll Ars :)
InclinedPlane 15y ago
There are a few 2048x1536 monitors. But that's not the only line of evidence the article's conclusions hinge on. There's also the OS, the version, and the source of the connections from apple's corporate IP block. Given all that, and given what we already know about the iPad 3 (it will have a higher resolution display) Occam's razor leads to the conclusion that these are pre-release iPad 3 devices. The 2nd most likely conclusion is that this is an intentional hoax on the part of someone within Apple, which is hardly a more credible idea.
- RBerenguel 15y ago
  As I said below, all together makes sense for the iPad3 testing. But they say that resolution is very odd, and I don't agree (like you said). I'm not denying all the article, just their resolution argument.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
kprobst 15y ago
My wife's computer LCD monitor is a Samsung that uses this resolution natively (I think), so maybe it isn't that rare.

RBerenguel 15y ago

Btw, checked and found some "Safaries" - 535.8+ with a screen resolution of 1024x600 (operating system version not set, some with Flash support...)

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
mappu 15y ago
My beta-channel Chrome is 535.19 today, so i don't think that's particularly unusual. (Assuming Webkit versioning is Major.Minor and not decimal)

woobar 15y ago

Same here - 12 visits with Chrome for Windows last month with this resolution

recoiledsnake 15y ago

If the visits are from Apple's block of IPs, the argument is not really crapish. It can be that Apple employees are trolling Ars, but there's a better chance they are testing pre-release devices.

RBerenguel 15y ago
They affirm there are very few devices with this resolution. My GA data (and others) disagrees with this. As for the IP range, I think this makes it more legit. But I'd love Apple employees to troll Ars :)

InclinedPlane 15y ago

There are a few 2048x1536 monitors. But that's not the only line of evidence the article's conclusions hinge on. There's also the OS, the version, and the source of the connections from apple's corporate IP block. Given all that, and given what we already know about the iPad 3 (it will have a higher resolution display) Occam's razor leads to the conclusion that these are pre-release iPad 3 devices. The 2nd most likely conclusion is that this is an intentional hoax on the part of someone within Apple, which is hardly a more credible idea.

RBerenguel 15y ago
As I said below, all together makes sense for the iPad3 testing. But they say that resolution is very odd, and I don't agree (like you said). I'm not denying all the article, just their resolution argument.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]

kprobst 15y ago

My wife's computer LCD monitor is a Samsung that uses this resolution natively (I think), so maybe it isn't that rare.