# iPhone 4's screen less fatiguing than the iPad's?



## Lysis_and_Isis (Aug 13, 2010)

If you're like me, you've told friends you find it far easier to read on an iPhone 4 than the current iPad because of the superior resolution. When people doubt that's possible, here's your backup:

http://techcrunch.com/2010/06/21/ios-4-iphone-4-ipad/

If the seven-inch iPad debuts soon with a retinal display and iOS4, I might consider picking one up. Until then, my feeling is that Apple provided the iPad with a gorgeous IPS screen but implemented a level of resolution that can be fatiguing. They improved on that with the iPhone 4, which has the most beautiful screen of any smartphone I've used so far (though I'm hoping that will change with new phones by Samsung and HTC).

Another interesting option for non-fatiguing reading and writing: Retrofitting a Samsung Netbook with a Pixel Qi.


----------



## Cardinal (Feb 24, 2010)

I took one look at the iPad and knew the resolution wasn't high enough for me to read with for long periods of time.  When the iPhone 4 was announced with the Retina display was announced I was so glad that I didn't buy in iPad.  Love the iPhone 4 screen!


----------



## VictoriaP (Mar 1, 2009)

*shrugs*

I have both.  The ip4 screen is gorgeous, but that doesn't change the fact that it's tiny.  I'll read for short periods on it, but for real reading, I'll take the iPad every time.  The difference in resolution isn't enough to cause visual fatigue.  I've read several books on it without problem.

And a retina screen even half the size of the current iPad could very well double the price according to analysts.  I'm sorry, but though I adore my iPad, and though our extended family has six of the damn things, they're already overpriced.  No way in hell would I pay twice the price just for a screen upgrade--or even another couple hundred.


----------



## pidgeon92 (Oct 27, 2008)

I wonder if it is the resolution, or the amount of light generated. The iPad has such a large surface.

I read on my iPad quite often at night, I've been working on two books on it in the last week. I can't say I've noticed any eye fatigue.... Just plain fatigue, well.....


----------



## Sandpiper (Oct 28, 2008)

I read on my iPad with no problem.  I like it.  It's the weight of the iPad that bothers me though.


----------



## Lysis_and_Isis (Aug 13, 2010)

To be clear, I didn't start this thread in order to criticize iPad owners.  If you're happy with your purchase, as so many are, then more power to you.  My comments were really intended as validations for those of us who, because of age, job-related fatigue or a thousand other reasons, can feel pressure on our eyelids after reading for even reasonable amounts of time.

Some people express public hatred for Apple products because they imagine that forming mobs of detractors validates their individuality.  I'm not here to do that.  Real individuality comes from being true to your own perceptions and insights, not publicly reacting to brand names for effect.  

My purpose is actually to validate the perceptions of people who might have had similar experiences to mine.  Reputation-wise, this is the least appealing time in history to carry an iPhone: the flawed antenna and Apple's rather defensive public response to the issue have given new cred to people's ad hominem attacks of Apple. Yet it's a good time to carry an iPad because it is new and because it is born for active (not passive) use and is therefore unique among Apple's portable devices that are not actually laptops.

I simply want to go validate my own experience because it is completely contrary to what hype would have people believe.  

You've probably heard that parts of Brooklyn, New York have become sites of hipster cred. Go there and you'll find it's actually true.  If you live on a certain block in Green Point and you're gainfully employed, you're supposed to read Chomsky, use Linux on your laptop and carry a Droid (which is fine if that's what you like, but it shouldn't be a social mandate).  You're either supposed to snicker inwardly at people who carry an iPhone or still use the older model you bought a few years ago.

But all of that is predicated on a lie:  On the investment of brand names with innate characteristics they don't actually possess.  

Why shouldn't people choose the phone or tablet that is most useful to them and will give them the most pleasure?  If the widespread use of an Apple product gives users greater access to networks of individual developers with unique ideas, then why is it useful to characterize Apple users as being in proprietary lockstep?  What's the point of choosing a more obscure phone or tablet if the result is that your exposure to devs with new ideas becomes more limited?  What's the point of using a device with more functionality that becomes less functional for you due to practical limitations in everyday usage? 

People who characterize other people as idiots simply because they use Apple products imagine they're showing off their geek cred.  What they're really showing is the consumer version of racism:  Making assumptions about the intelligence of strangers based on irrelevant external characteristics (such the look of the object they're carrying).  

It's a scenario from some impossible 50s TV ad come to life, in which actors invest products with public significance no gray-flanneled ad man ever thought they really would. "Why do nine out of ten women prefer a Burma Shave man?"  "She'll never get married until she switches to Maidenform."

§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§§

So to sum:  I have no problem with the iPad personally.  One of my oldest friends has been developing apps for the iPad since it was first released and I support him.  Rather it is my eyes that have the problem.  They don't have the same problem with the iPhone 4. 

Sites like Engadget and Gizmodo have suggested a 7" iPad might be in the works.  If that rumor proves true, I do think the newer device is likely to have a retinal screen.  I don't buy the argument that devs and analysts are (i) unquestionably correct or (ii) in universal agreement that the implementation of a retinal screen on a larger device would be cost-prohibitive.  I, too, know devs and read analysts.  They haven't been saying that.


----------



## Mike D. aka jmiked (Oct 28, 2008)

To answer the question posed in the thread title:  iPhone 4's screen less fatiguing than the iPad's? 

I don’t find that to be the case.

Mike


----------



## Lysis_and_Isis (Aug 13, 2010)

This isn't a poll, it's a discussion.  In this case, the original post contains the full subject, not the title.

Have you made a comparison between both devices over a prolonged period or are you primarily here to affirm the value of owning an iPad?  If you're in the second camp, then you might have missed the point of the thread (which is fine, since no one's being graded) -- as I said, I'm not disputing the worth of anyone's purchase.  But if you're in the first camp, then I hope you'll go into more detail.


----------



## Lysis_and_Isis (Aug 13, 2010)

Cardinal said:


> I took one look at the iPad and knew the resolution wasn't high enough for me to read with for long periods of time. . . . Love the iPhone 4 screen!


I agree with you completely, Cardinal -- though, just to be sure, I spent a few days with a friend's iPad.

Looking forward to finding out where Apple chooses to implement the retinal display next (especially if it's the rumored seven-inch iPad). You know they aren't going to limit it to one device, and I have artist friends who won't buy an iPhone because AT&T reception issues are the worst in New York and San Francisco, where they spend most of their time professionally. They crave a retinal Wifi tablet.


----------

