<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Vox Sylvatici &#187; retina display</title>
	<atom:link href="http://voxsylvatici.com/tag/retina-display/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://voxsylvatici.com</link>
	<description>My voice on the web.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 Jun 2010 05:37:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Resolving Resolution</title>
		<link>http://voxsylvatici.com/2010/06/12/resolving-resolution/</link>
		<comments>http://voxsylvatici.com/2010/06/12/resolving-resolution/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jun 2010 15:52:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sylvaticus</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iphone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[retina display]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://voxsylvatici.com/?p=77</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Phil Plait tackles Raymond Soneira's criticism of Job's Retina Display description.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There&#8217;s been much made in the last several days about Apple&#8217;s <a href="http://www.apple.com/iphone/features/retina-display.html" target="_blank">Retina Display</a> on the new <a href="http://www.apple.com/iphone/" target="_blank">iPhone 4</a>. After Wired&#8217;s strongly worded <a href="http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/06/iphone-4-retina/" target="_blank">article</a> by Raymond Soneira of <a href="http://displaymate.com/" target="_blank">DisplayMate Technologies</a>, prompted Phil Plait to <a href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/06/10/resolving-the-iphone-resolution/" target="_blank">respond</a>, with what I feel is perhaps the most rational explanation of why Apple isn&#8217;t lying, as he concludes:</p>
<blockquote><p>Still, the headline used by Wired.com was clearly incorrect; Jobs wasn’t falsely advertising the iPhone’s capabilities at all. I’ll note that I like Wired magazine quite a bit, and what we have here is most likely just an overzealous editor. But a lot of people read the headlines and it taints their view; someone reading that article may be more likely to think Jobs, once again, has overblown a product to excite people. He didn’t.</p></blockquote>
<p>Phil Plait is no stranger to this topic, &#8220;having spend a few years calibrating a camera on board Hubble.&#8221;</p>
<p>Hindsight being what it is, perhaps Apple could have phrases like &#8220;for many,&#8221; and &#8220;for some,&#8221; but I think John Gruber, who has held the new phone and seen the Retina Display in action, have the way of it in his <a href="http://daringfireball.net/linked/2010/06/10/samsung" target="_blank">response</a> to Samsung&#8217;s criticism</p>
<blockquote><p>They can say this now, but they won’t be able to say such things and be taken seriously after the iPhone 4 is released and people have seen it in person. Until they figure out a way to make AMOLED visible in daylight, they’re not even in the game.</p></blockquote>
<p>If Jobs is wrong, or worse, lying, then one has to ask if scientific exactitude is required for every everything we say. If that&#8217;s the new canon, there are a lot of liars out there.</p>
<p>S</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://voxsylvatici.com/2010/06/12/resolving-resolution/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

