Shared publicly  - 
 
500ppi just seems like a waste; if your eye can't discern individual pixels after 320 or so, I can't imagine how more would benefit you in any meaningful way.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/10/20/toshiba-shows-off-6-inch-tablet-display-with-498ppi-resolution/
2
1
Matt Walters's profile photoEgor Kloos's profile photoDavid Oliver's profile photoAlexander Banach's profile photo
6 comments
 
My guess is the utility might be for high end imaging equipment. I just can't imagine consumer electronics benefitting. But, hey, it's not like I've actually seen the display.
 
Sure, useful dividends. Displays of this resolution allow computers to display information - in plain sight - that cannot be discerned by human beings. Other computers with high-resolution cameras can read this information, and they can conspire against us. WAKE UP, PEOPLE! IT'S A CONSPIRACY!
 
From what I understand, which is admittedly not much, is that ppi (sensor pixels) is also related to the RGB pattern when considering image pixels and how visible they are.
The argument for 3D also seems somewhat valid, not that I'd ever want or use 3D.
 
498ppi is certainly not a waste, especially when viewed close up. High dot pitch screens are one of the things I'm really looking forward to - thanks for posting!
 
Indeed, displays used for viewing MRI scans (for example) need all the pixels they can get without making the display larger than a house.
 
The fine art community prints at over 600dpi, and the richness it boasts is unreal. Some print as high as 1200dpi. All of the science behind the study behind the 1 arcsecond of resolution is true for 20/20 vision. But take a near-sided person, whom has an advantage to seeing close up, and visual acuity is much higher. High pixel pitch displays are the future, and the race has only just begun. Thanks for sharing!
Add a comment...