4 ms·

>>Retina branding [...] is not significantly about competing on productivity. I am far from a UI/UX expert, but I (and many others I've read about [e.g. see cs

by berntb 14y ago

>>Retina branding [...] is not significantly about competing on productivity. I am far from a UI/UX expert, but I (and many others I've read about [e.g. see cstross in another comment]) have the experience that "retina displays" make a very big difference for text [readability]. If you really have good references to support your claim my experience is marketing bullshit, I'm very interested. (Personally, I think HN has degenerated to FUD wars over tablets the last week(s). At least increase quality.)

brudgers 14y ago
I'm speaking about the branding of Retina. It is the same "megapixels" advertising used with commodity cameras with an upscale wrapper. More pixels isn't technological innovation. It isn't great design. It's a bigger box of soap for the same low price. That's not to say that Retina isn't innovative. Delivering such a display at the price point and quantities that Apple is, is a feat of logistics. Apple has a real competitive advantage. Retina displays may provide a productivity boost to some people. But that's not the basis of it's branding. The branding is a mass market appeal to hedonistic pursuits and aspirational consumption. There's nothing wrong with that.
- berntb 14y ago
  Oh please, everything new from any company is named by the marketing department. And you make a point of condemning that?! Please not on HN... :-(
  - brudgers 14y ago
    I'm not condemning anything. What I have opined is that the manner in which the current focus Retina has affected Apple's branding marks a shift in the structure of their advertizing. It has gone from emphasizing the system (e.g. "magical iPad" or "I'm a Mac") to emphasizing the specs of components, i.e. the Retina advertising logically equivalent to focusing on more RAM or a bigger Hard Drive. Fundamentally it's just numbers. There's no direct engagement of the consumer's imagination. "Ten hours of battery" allows a person to picture themselves untethered in a Istanbul coffee shop. "More pixels" doesn't.
    - DeepDuh 14y ago
      May I ask you whether you have ever sat with one of those 'retina' devices (I know you don't like the word, but there isn't really a better way to put it) for some extended time, say >1h? If you had, and your eyesight is normal, I can pretty much guarantee your stance would be different. You can read much smaller text and you get generally less tired working on those devices - going back is like a punch in the face for me personally. These are tangible UX improvements, just like battery life. It may not be for everyone (mostly depending on eyesight) put please don't go around marginalizing people for liking a product for such a feature.
      - brudgers 14y ago
        I don't care one way or the other about the word "Retina"...though it is a bit tinny. What matters to me is the way in which a piece of hardware facilitates or hinders my workflow. I sit a certain distance from the screen and perform certain tasks various pieces of software. A display is better or worse based upon my individual needs (and by extrapolation better for someone else based upon their individual needs, not mine). Ultimately, I prefer a larger effective dot pitch - i.e. the lower effective resolution of the 13" Retina MacBook is probably better suited to me than the author of the article. [see my comment here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3667792 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3667792] On the other hand, any Macbook is a non-starter. My workflow is at critical times dependent upon more horsepower than one will find on most laptops and the software I own runs on Windows. Having once owned a Porsche, I am not unsympathetic to people who enjoy aspirational products despite the tradoffs they entail. I was then and am today willing to admit that gazing upon it admiringly was pleasurable. On the other hand, I have never considered my choice of automobile objectively better, except in the sense that it was right for me, and despite having been bald and in my forties at the time, I found humor in the stereo type.
    - lotyrin 14y ago
      > It has gone from emphasizing the system (e.g. "magical iPad" or "I'm a Mac") to emphasizing the specs of components They aren't saying "Now with X% more pixels", it has a name and the name means an experience: sharper text and images.

by berntb 14y ago

brudgers 14y ago

I'm speaking about the branding of Retina. It is the same "megapixels" advertising used with commodity cameras with an upscale wrapper. More pixels isn't technological innovation. It isn't great design. It's a bigger box of soap for the same low price. That's not to say that Retina isn't innovative. Delivering such a display at the price point and quantities that Apple is, is a feat of logistics. Apple has a real competitive advantage. Retina displays may provide a productivity boost to some people. But that's not the basis of it's branding. The branding is a mass market appeal to hedonistic pursuits and aspirational consumption. There's nothing wrong with that.

berntb 14y ago
Oh please, everything new from any company is named by the marketing department. And you make a point of condemning that?! Please not on HN... :-(
- brudgers 14y ago
  I'm not condemning anything. What I have opined is that the manner in which the current focus Retina has affected Apple's branding marks a shift in the structure of their advertizing. It has gone from emphasizing the system (e.g. "magical iPad" or "I'm a Mac") to emphasizing the specs of components, i.e. the Retina advertising logically equivalent to focusing on more RAM or a bigger Hard Drive. Fundamentally it's just numbers. There's no direct engagement of the consumer's imagination. "Ten hours of battery" allows a person to picture themselves untethered in a Istanbul coffee shop. "More pixels" doesn't.
  - DeepDuh 14y ago
    May I ask you whether you have ever sat with one of those 'retina' devices (I know you don't like the word, but there isn't really a better way to put it) for some extended time, say >1h? If you had, and your eyesight is normal, I can pretty much guarantee your stance would be different. You can read much smaller text and you get generally less tired working on those devices - going back is like a punch in the face for me personally. These are tangible UX improvements, just like battery life. It may not be for everyone (mostly depending on eyesight) put please don't go around marginalizing people for liking a product for such a feature.
    - brudgers 14y ago
      I don't care one way or the other about the word "Retina"...though it is a bit tinny. What matters to me is the way in which a piece of hardware facilitates or hinders my workflow. I sit a certain distance from the screen and perform certain tasks various pieces of software. A display is better or worse based upon my individual needs (and by extrapolation better for someone else based upon their individual needs, not mine). Ultimately, I prefer a larger effective dot pitch - i.e. the lower effective resolution of the 13" Retina MacBook is probably better suited to me than the author of the article. [see my comment here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3667792 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3667792] On the other hand, any Macbook is a non-starter. My workflow is at critical times dependent upon more horsepower than one will find on most laptops and the software I own runs on Windows. Having once owned a Porsche, I am not unsympathetic to people who enjoy aspirational products despite the tradoffs they entail. I was then and am today willing to admit that gazing upon it admiringly was pleasurable. On the other hand, I have never considered my choice of automobile objectively better, except in the sense that it was right for me, and despite having been bald and in my forties at the time, I found humor in the stereo type.
  - lotyrin 14y ago
    > It has gone from emphasizing the system (e.g. "magical iPad" or "I'm a Mac") to emphasizing the specs of components They aren't saying "Now with X% more pixels", it has a name and the name means an experience: sharper text and images.