[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]First Apple didn't achieve any kind of pixel density because the display it's not theirs.They buy them from LG and Samsung. Also the iPhone was never the phone with the highest ppi. The iPhone 4 was launched in 2010 with a 326ppi display, LG in 2008 had the LU1400 with a 333 ppi display. Perhaps this is why Apple chose a LG display in the iPhone 4.According to Jobs himself, the requirement for a phone display to be a retina display if for it to have a pixel density higher than 300ppi. In 2008 Sony Ericsson had the X1 with 311 ppi. Even earlier than that, and I think it was the first "retina display", in 2007 Toshiba had Portege G900 also with 311ppi.The only thing Apple was first, is to name this kind of display successfully (Toshiba called it Print Quality display).[/citation]If all you've said is accurate (not that I'm saying they aren't), then interesting info...
I guess you're right if you put it that way, that they really didn't "achieve" that pixel density per se. Though, anyway, I'd think that Apple still deserves merit for choosing and buying those specific displays for their phones. Again, I'm not an Apple fan, but I'd want to see merit given to whom merit's due.
I didn't know other companies released such high-DPI phones earlier on. Two things may have contributed to this. 1) I was far from the tech news reader I am today. 2) Apple might've just had more marketing, or LG, Toshiba and SE might've not known that that amount of DPI had that special property and thus may have not marketed it as having such (though, I wouldn't know if they did).
For a moment, I thought that the Portege G900 was a laptop, but it said on Wikipedia that it's a phone and it has a DPI of 313.
Just for the record though, I didn't claim that the iPhone has or had the highest DPI, nor did I claim they were the first to have devices with "Retina Displays." This doesn't make what you've said though any less useful, and I appreciate the info still. So thank you!