Ask HN: Why aren’t there more third party retina screens? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Why aren’t there more third party retina screens?

47 pointsfideloper39 comments

Retina screens have been around for something like 8 years, but there’s seemingly only one non-Apple retina screen that exists.

Is there a technical reason for this? Or is it logistical? Surely there’s demand for it, not everyone is buying screens for gaming.

View on HN

Retina is an Apple trademark for a Hi-DPI screen that supports a certain pixel density (PPI) that they dictate.

There are several third-party Hi-DPI displays that meet or exceed the lowest pixel density that Apple calls "Retina".

As another commenter mentioned, use https://www.sven.de/dpi/ and go find a monitor with that resolution and screen size. If you figure around 215 ppi or so, you should be golden.

Be aware that there's more difference than you'd think between relative minor pixel density differences, eg 180 PPI and 218 PPI.

> There are several third-party Hi-DPI displays

I believe there are only very few above ~185 PPI (24" 4K) like Apple’s 27" 5K, except for the LG one and Dell’s 32" 8K. (Oh, and there’s Microsoft’s Surface Studio with 28" 4500 x 3000 at 192 PPI.) So for PPI > 200 the question is justified.

https://pixensity.com/list/desktop/

Apple’s got the biggest Hi-DPI monitors, but not the highest DPI.

Thanks for the link, but the only monitor in that list with higher DPI than Apple's offerings (218 PPI) is the Dell UP3218K (280 PPI) that I already mentioned. All of the 27" 5K (218 PPI) use the same panels from LG. Next (I'm ignoring the IBM and Viewsonic models from 2001/2002) there's the Microsoft Surface Studio at 192 DPI that I also mentioned, and next are 24" 4K models at 185 PPI. Next again are the models at 163 PPI. Again, above 200 PPI there's only the few 27" 5K models from LG and Apple, and the single Dell 24" 8K.

There are. It is a branding and trademark issue.

The point of a retina display is to have a higher pixel density than the human eye can distinguish (at a certain distance).

There are many displays that have far higher pixel density than the iPhone.

According to the list here https://pixensity.com/list/phone/ there are/were at least 40+ non-Apple phones with higher ppi than the iPhone X

I think OP was talking about desktop displays. AFAIK, there is currently only 1 non-Apple branded "Retina" (~218 PPI) desktop display on the market.

Check https://www.sven.de/dpi/

All of the 8K displays have a higher ppi than the Apple 5K display (215 ppi).

But it's not a retina display until apple signs off on it. I don't think most manufacturers are going to think the ROI on the time/effort/money is worth it.

Fun fact, apple gets a cut when you buy any MFI certified chargers or cables.

Would you also say there are no other smartphones on the market if apple had to sign off on approvals? That's the same thing as you're saying here. The panels have a greater DPI than what apple calls "retina"

Just because apple doesn't call it something doesn't mean it doesn't exist, that's patently absurd

Retina is just a trademark, nothing more

Correct, its a trademark owned by apple. Apple has to sign off on anything using it. And until apple does that, its not a retina display. That's how brands/trademarks work, right?. Its just a label. Isn't that what I said in my original post?

It seems like you are reading words I didn't write. That's patently absurd!

So why is it the trademark that matters rather than the function/specs of the panel. Which part is actually important for how the product gets used?

It's not.

> AFAIK, there is currently only 1 non-Apple branded "Retina" (~218 PPI) desktop display on the market.