Most biased article I have ever seen.
The anti-aliasing bull crap is not even worth saying. There's literally zero difference between what was presented and what they came up with.
Really disappointed in Gizmodo for featuring that, I guess after Apple rightfully burned them, all journalistic integrity flew out the window.
The link was to Gawker. The original article was here: Digital Society ? Blog Archive ? Apple faking 489 to 815 PPI on iPhone 4 ads
Look, you only destroy your own credibility when you defend Apple blindly in the face of proof that they lied about the Anti-Aliasing published by someone who has no axe to grind. (former ZDNet technical director George Ou).
You impress no one being a blind fanboy. Its sooo yesterday.
Instead of calling it a biased article prove it wrong. Back up your claim. Remember, this is the same man who claimed Total Kidney Failure was a hormonal imbalance. He has serious issues with the truth.
Instead of calling it a biased article prove it wrong. Back up your claim.
First of all, that article is actually incorrect. Apple shows directly that part of this a is composed of 4 pixels, and part of THIS a, is composed of 16 pixels. The error made in the article is where he confuses the amount of pixels with dpi. He's multiplying by 2, when the screen resolution is 2x larger in both horizontal and vertical, meaning it needs to be multiplied by 4.
Just tested it myself, as a designer I'm curious if he was actually correct.
Here's what I did:
Create one document at 326dpi.
Create another at 163dpi (iPhone 3GS dpi).
Make a 10pt "a" in both documents.
Rasterize the "a" in the 163dpi document, then increase the size of the document to 326dpi with "Nearest Neighbour" resampling, to show the accurate pixels.
Place the 2 "a"s side by side.
Result:
Seems to me it is not unlike Apple's demonstration.
Also, the increased dpis for the presentation and videos are because it is supposed to be an enlarged representation of what your eye would see. A human eye can not distinguish past 300 dpi, so it is accurate because it will appear smooth to you whether or not it actually is.
The link was to Gawker. The original article was here: Digital Society ? Blog Archive ? Apple faking 489 to 815 PPI on iPhone 4 ads
Look, you only destroy your own credibility when you defend Apple blindly in the face of proof that they lied about the Anti-Aliasing published by someone who has no axe to grind. (former ZDNet technical director George Ou).
You impress no one being a blind fanboy. Its sooo yesterday.
Instead of calling it a biased article prove it wrong. Back up your claim. Remember, this is the same man who claimed Total Kidney Failure was a hormonal imbalance. He has serious issues with the truth.
Most biased article I have ever seen.
The anti-aliasing bull crap is not even worth saying. There's literally zero difference between what was presented and what they came up with.
Really disappointed in Gizmodo for featuring that, I guess after Apple rightfully burned them, all journalistic integrity flew out the window.
I don't
and will never respect them.