No, it is not. It would be perfect for a 6'' phone, maybe. The goal is to have at least double the pixel density, and my 2016 tablet can reach this ( ~2700x1800 at 12'' ).
Even Surfaces have been using 1440p at 12'' since 2016, and 2880 x 1920 since 2018! Why would Android & Apple tablets at much smaller screen size have higher DPIs, if 1080p was perfect? Do you expect to put Android tablets closer to your face than x86 tablets for some reason?
Sigh... since when has DPI started _decreasing_ again? I refuse to accept this trend, in the same way it was stupid back in the 2000s when LCDs became a thing.
The human hardware isn't getting any better, so we must accept that there exists some upper bound beyond which improving resolution isn't a selling point for most people, especially given the necessary tradeoffs in battery life, processing power, memory usage, and input latency it entails. Now consider that this ceiling may have been hit 20 years ago, and that the continued dominance of 1920x1080 may not be because manufacturers are lazy, but because most people are happy enough with it.
It's not. Finding the ceiling is always going to involve overshooting the ceiling and then walking back from there. It sounds as though you're not willing to consider even the possibility that this may be the effective end of progress for this combination of technology and use case, at least for values of "progress" that involve increasing resolution, rather than values that involve decreasing cost.
Or rather it sounds as someone misreading me again as asking for "progress" when I'm just asking not to skimp over on what was already offered 10 years ago and practically everyone else still offers today.
The Steam Hardware Survey shows that 1920x1080 is still the majority resolution, and that's among an audience that's inordinately populated by technological enthusiasts. The fact that people are seemingly dead-set on sticking to 1920x1080 despite--as you point out--the availability of alternatives only further strengthens the argument that the majority of consumers just don't particularly value higher resolutions.
Note that I game at 1080p (or worse), even on my setup with dual 4k monitors (because it is also over 10 years old), so neither shows up on steam survey as anything other than 1080p (which also puts dual setups at a different category). Gaming at 1080p or even higher still requires thousands on GPUs which I'm not willing to do. However simply having more than 1080p for desktop usage is accessible and has been so for over 10 years. A 4k monitor costs a fraction of what a gaming GPU costs. My desktop iGPU from 2014 has zero problems driving 2x4k. It also does so with the system consuming less than 60W from the wall at usage (lower than some laptop CPUs do these days).
If you want to play the useless popularity game, go and check what are the resolutions on the phones and tablets with even smaller screens sold in the last 10 years (which exceeds the number of laptops by far), and even friggin' eink notepads.
"The fact" is people today would never accept sub-retina dpis even for cheap phones, and the market has clearly spoken. "The fact" is your arguments about human perception are utter bullshit (as trivially disproven as todays arguments about 60fps), and remind me of the discussions I had when forced to use 60fps 800x600 TN screens (pure hell on earth) after having used 1280 at 90hz for ages with CRTs, all in the name of "progress".
> so neither shows up on steam survey as anything other than 1080p
The hardware survey doesn't occur while games are running. It's recording the display setting of your desktop, which would put you and everyone like you in the 4K bucket.
> If you want to play the useless popularity game, go and check what are the resolutions on the phones and tablets with even smaller screens sold in the last 10 years
I have a rather new high-end phone. Its native resolution is 2400x1080, and that 2400 is only there because phones have a particularly long aspect ratio compared to other devices.
> "The fact" is people today would never accept sub-retina dpis even for cheap phones, and the market has clearly spoken.
1920x1080 is a wildly popular resolution. You appear to be frustrated that the market hasn't spoken in your favor.
> "The fact" is your arguments about human perception are utter bullshit
You appear to be hallucinating arguments that I haven't made.
It's higher DPI than a 24" 4K monitor. It is plenty dense, especially for a battery powered device where the power needed to drive the display is a real consideration.
That's why this has half the resolution of my current same size 12'' tablet, even though my current device has also half the battery capacity, and likely costed half than this thing will cost.
Even if you use today's prices, the cheapest iPad has almost double the resolution. No, 1080p at 12'' it is not plenty dense. You do not put this smaller thing as far from your face as a 24'' monitor.
Triple the DPI? Are you doing the calculations right? The DPI of this screen is 189. The iPad Standard, Air, and Pro at 11 and 13 inches have a DPI of 264. The iPad Mini is a standout at 326 DPI, which is 1.72x the DPI.
You are correct; I am using number of horizontal lines rather than computing the actual DPI. But this barely changes my argument, since even when they are at screens of similar size cheap iPads have double the number of horizontal lines. I have updated my post to reflect that.
They have not done that for years? That used to be a thing 5 years ago or so, but nowadays battery saving mode just forces 60 hz refresh rate but otherwise does not change the resolution. I do not buy top of the line devices so I do not know for sure, but mine has >1080p and keeps the resolution for sure.
And, to give an idea of what are we talking about, even in such power saving modes these much smaller and older phones still have more pixels than a 1080p screen.
Even Surfaces have been using 1440p at 12'' since 2016, and 2880 x 1920 since 2018! Why would Android & Apple tablets at much smaller screen size have higher DPIs, if 1080p was perfect? Do you expect to put Android tablets closer to your face than x86 tablets for some reason?
Sigh... since when has DPI started _decreasing_ again? I refuse to accept this trend, in the same way it was stupid back in the 2000s when LCDs became a thing.