Team
We are aware of some scaling issues with the new iPad.
We are working round the clock to get new bits out to you ASAP.
Please let me know of any issues in this forum.
Thanks
Carlos. [import]uid: 24 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 323417[/import]
Looking forward to the next daily build Carlos! 
[import]uid: 44127 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93836[/import]
This is what I’m seeing working with yesterday’s daily build. In an iPad/Portrait only app I’m working on I had this in the config.lua
[lua] content =
{
width = 768,
height = 1024,
scale = “zoomEven”,
fps = 60,
}[/lua]
What’s happening is the images are getting scaled up by 2x (maybe 4x if you think about it) and then only the lower left 384x512 of the original image is being displayed, but scaled up to fit the whole screen.
The touch events, however, are where they should be relative to the screen space–they are not scaled up like the images.
Here is what it looks like on the iPad 1
http://no2games.com/images/iPad1.png
Here is what it looks like on the “new” iPad
http://no2games.com/images/iPad3.png
Changing the scale option has no effect…
[lua] {
width = 768,
height = 1024,
scale = “zoomStretch”,
fps = 60,
}[/lua]
I took a shot in the dark at updating the width/height, but that displays nothing…
[lua] {
width = 1536,
height = 2048,
scale = “zoomStretch”,
fps = 60,
} [/lua]
Happy to test something if it helps… Both of my apps are affected in the same way. [import]uid: 51498 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93849[/import]
Also, if you remove the scale the images center at the upper left corner…
[lua]application =
{
content =
{
width = 768,
height = 1024,
–scale = “zoomEven”,
fps = 60,
}
}[/lua]
Touch events still remain where they should be… [import]uid: 51498 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93857[/import]
Wilson : Thanks !!!
___ EVERYONE : I Think I got enough UUID’s … so hold on…for a few…
C. [import]uid: 24 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93858[/import]
I don’t have the actual device yet but…
Just tested 767 on retina ipad xcode simulator with my app, looks OK [import]uid: 10478 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93888[/import]
Looking good so far. I will beat on it for awhile, but at this point I think you’all have really scored for your users! Thanx for hitting it so hard! @NightmaresWithn
http://www.wizards3030vs.com
Now…anyone on tips: My app is still waiting for review. Can I slip a new build in before they get to it? [import]uid: 21331 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93893[/import]
Yes, just reject the binary and re-upload… [import]uid: 10478 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93894[/import]
Thanks! [import]uid: 21331 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93900[/import]
Hi all, build 767 has been patched. More details (http://blog.anscamobile.com/2012/03/update-ipad-retina-display/)
Post a comment in this thread (not the above blog) if you continue to have problems on the iPad 3.
thanks!
walter [import]uid: 26 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93902[/import]
Couple of questions…
Are all existing Corona SDK apps impacted by this? Or are apps built against an older daily (that support iOS 3x for instance) also impacted?
Are there plans to port these fixes back to a pre-killing of armv6 support builds?
What about non-universal build apps? For instance I have an app that is iPhone only, but those apps can run on an iPad in a small area in the center of the screen. Do we need to rebuild them?
I have several of my older apps which are not in a state of release at the moment.
Thanks
Rob [import]uid: 19626 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93905[/import]
Rob, we will take time and answer all the questions once the dust settles. Right now we just finished uploading the bits and getting feedback.
One thing I can tell you is that we will not be supporting armv6.
C.
[import]uid: 24 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93907[/import]
Carlos: Kudos on the quick fix. You guys are awesome.
I have 3 Corona-made apps in the iPad app store at the moment. I just want to double-check: My Corona subscription has since lapsed. I need to re-subscribe solely to apply this iPad 3 patch, correct? In other words, you don’t provide any sort of legacy app support at the moment?
-Evan
[import]uid: 13529 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93916[/import]
@robmiracle
At this point I think Ansca can only support what Apple supports. Needing to compile with xcode 4.3 for iOS 5.1 to fix the issue with iPad 3, prevents backward compatibility with older builds.
@General Rant
Honestly I was forming my own conspiracy about this as soon as I read there were issues. I believe it is just Apple forcing everyone to keep moving forward. In their defense, they almost have to. Outside of Apple junkies who buy the lastest and greatest, why upgrade? Apple products are if nothing else, great quality and reliable. Why would I stop using my iPod (2nd gen) when it still works great and can do most of what a 4th gen can. Faster chips and higher resolution screens are not enough for everyone to drop several hundred dollars for an upgrade. Same with Siri. It could of been offered to iPhone 4 users but that would not force upgrades.
From the other side of the coin, a developer perspective, I am none to happy. Unless I am mistaken we can’t set our old apps to exclude the new iPad. This leaves us with few options. We can recompile and drop old device support (possible angering users, which can turn into bad word of mouth/reviews). The other option is leave old apps as is and make a new separate iPad 3 only app to fix this problem. Then explain vocally with our old app, as much as possible, that it will not work on iPad 3 because of Apple’s changes (still getting angered users but you can pass the buck a little).
I could be completely wrong too. Perhaps Carlos will find out from Apple it’s just a bug with iOS 5.1 and can be patched on the OS side rather than forcing us to patch apps from the SDK side of things. That might just be wishful thinking though. [import]uid: 56820 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93922[/import]
I have both Xcode 4.2.1 and 4.3.1 installed. How do I force the compile to use the 4.3.1 version of Xcode? Currently it reports the following:
Copyright © 2009-2012 A n s c a , I n c .
Version: 2.0.0
Build: 2012.767
The file sandbox for this project is located at the following folder:
(/Users/Dave/Library/Application Support/Corona Simulator/FeltBoard-879AE90959F78C8BC6EE4F2136C79810)
WARNING: Simulator does not support multitouch events
WARNING: Simulator does not support accelerometer events
2012-03-16 19:13:13.827 Corona Simulator[91292:2403] xcode-select is using Xcode version: Xcode 4.2.1
Build version 4D502
xcode-select is using Xcode version: Xcode 4.2.1
Build version 4D502 [import]uid: 103459 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93948[/import]
https://developer.anscamobile.com/reference/xcode43 [import]uid: 24 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93950[/import]
@anderoth :: part of your conspiracy theory rings about right… i have an iPhone 3GS and a first gen iPad.
Most likely, I will eventually hand me down the iPad to someone and dump my 3G when I can’t install any apps due to an iOS change or an app that I truly use that no longer supports earlier iOS’s.
c. [import]uid: 24 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93952[/import]
Things are looking good, but I am having some problems with the new build that seem unrelated to the iPad fixes. The good news is that everything seems to look identical on the original iPad and on the new iPad. The issues I am seeing both seem to relate to alpha transparency with shapes. Attached are stills that exhibit the problem. In the first picture, the background is supposed to be white, and in fact is white when the screen does not need to rotate. In the second picture, the circle is supposed to be clear, but instead is somewhat gray.
[import]uid: 3671 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93966[/import]
I am seeing a similar problem in my app. I simulate a camera flash by creating a white display object that is then quickly faded to alpha = 0. I end up with a very faint grey film over the rest of the picture in my app until the display object calls removeself [import]uid: 103459 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93970[/import]
additionally… the display.screenCapture(true) method takes a very long time to complete. I am guessing this is because the image being saved to disk is a lot larger than in the past. [import]uid: 103459 topic_id: 23417 reply_id: 93971[/import]