[tragictrash]

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.

[netizen-936824]

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

[tragictrash]

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!

[netizen-936824]

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?

[tragictrash]

It's not.

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

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

That's what I was responding to. Great job.