Transition to '3x' iPhone 6 at 1704 x 960 Likely Smoother Than Move to Retina

Discussion in 'MacRumors.com News Discussion' started by MacRumors, May 14, 2014.

  1. macrumors bot

    MacRumors

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2001
    #1
    [​IMG]


    With an expected transition to a larger screen on the iPhone 6, MacRumors forum member pgiguere1 has taken a look at how non-optimized apps would appear on a rumored 1704 x 960 display that would move from the current "2x" pixel doubling technique to achieve Retina quality to a "3x" technique.

    In Apple's earlier transition to 2x Retina displays, it was relatively simple for non-Retina assets to be scaled up using automatic pixel doubling techniques to represent a single non-Retina pixel as a 2x2 grid of Retina pixels until developers could get up to speed. But with a potential move to 3x (or 1.5 times current Retina), many have wondered if that transition would be awkward.

    As pgiguere1 shows, while developers will undoubtedly want to optimize their apps with new 3x graphical assets, automatic scaling of current 2x assets will look considerably better on this new iPhone display than non-Retina assets did during the transition to 2x.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    While Apple is unlikely to announce a new resolution for the iPhone 6 at next month's Worldwide Developers Conference, the company is likely to begin providing more tools and encouraging developers to speed a push toward resolution-independent vector graphics and other changes that will facilitate a smooth transition to denser displays. But for those developers who are not ready by iPhone 6 launch day, their users are likely to still have a decent experience with unoptimized apps.

    Article Link: Transition to '3x' iPhone 6 at 1704 x 960 Likely Smoother Than Move to Retina
     
  2. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2012
    Location:
    London
    #2
    A higher PPI sounds great. Might as well if you're changing the screen size, too.
     
  3. ionjohn, May 14, 2014
    Last edited: May 14, 2014

    macrumors 65816

    ionjohn

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2013
    Location:
    Canada
    #3
    Apple is awesome at making unknown resolutions!
     
  4. sualpine, May 14, 2014
    Last edited: May 14, 2014

    macrumors 6502

    sualpine

    Joined:
    May 13, 2013
    #4
    Any perception of how "rough" or "smooth" this will be is irrelevant.

    The complaint originates from developers who spend more time complaining than developing.

    Remember how "rough" it was getting native iPad apps in 2010?
    Remember how "rough" it was waiting for retina iPhone apps later in 2010?
    Or how "rough" it was for iPad retina apps in 2012?
    Or how "rough" it was for developers to move to the iOS 7 design language?
    Or my personal favorite, how "rough" the Intel transition was?
    And the "rough" transition to OS X retina apps for the rMBP?
    And why stop there? Remember how "rough" System 7 to Mac OS 8 was? And OS 9 to OS X?

    The point is, they'll always call it "rough", and it's never as bad as they say it is.

    They're always going to complain.
     
  5. macrumors 65816

    taptic

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2012
    Location:
    California
    #5
    Hey hey! Who knew!? You can actually post stuff that doesn't involve a mockup?!
     
  6. macrumors 601

    Traverse

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2013
    Location:
    Here
  7. Bathplug, May 14, 2014
    Last edited: May 14, 2014

    macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2010
    #7
    I wonder how many developers will still release paid updates because they've "re-written the app from the ground up"
     
  8. macrumors regular

    Futurix

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2011
    Location:
    London
    #8
    I kinda like Apple's technology transitions - it weeds out apps that are no longer maintained.

    Right now I don't have a single non-iOS7 non-4'' app on my iPhone (some non-iOS7 games excepted because of entirely custom UI) and all of them were updated since September 2013.
     
  9. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2013
    #9
    Well, that was simple. It’s nice when stuff is easy to understand like that.
     
  10. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 22, 2007
    #10
    Some might. I would almost bet the Fantastical guys will take advantage of this as a reason to charge for another version.
    However as long as the existing apps scale to fullscreen without the way iPhone apps do on the iPad, then I expect few apps to be worth paying for an upgrade based ONLY on resolution with no significant features.
     
  11. macrumors 604

    bushido

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2008
    Location:
    Germany
    #11
    hmmm weird resolution. any taller without making it wider and its literally gonna flip out of your hand

    + it would mean those star wars light saber memes were right all along ;)
     
  12. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2014
    #12
    It is not possible in real world!

    You make it too simple that things can be multiply.

    But you forgot a very simple and major point:
    Pixel is a Unit!

    Simply not every object can be multiply by 1.5 times, for example, if something is draw by 31 pixel X 31 pixel, by multiply it to 1.5 times, you will have.....:confused:
    46.5 pixel!:eek:

    You just cannot have 0.5 pixel! That means you need to draw a new one for this resolution. THEN it is not a simple multiply it!
     
  13. macrumors G5

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #13
    Pretty much the same thing though. Now we'll get a slew of icon/home screen mockups instead of case mockups. :)
     
  14. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2011
    #14
    It's multiplying by 1.5, it's multiplying by 3 since the retina is already multiplied by 2! So all drawings have even pixel count
     
  15. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    #15
    Hope the apps I use regularly are on the ball for this one!
     
  16. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2012
    #16
    I saw that resolution yesterday at the eye docs after she administered the dilating drops. Cleared up in a few hours :)
     
  17. macrumors regular

    aaronsullivan

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2003
    Location:
    Rochester, NY
    #17
    That's a nice list. Where is your evidence that it's not rough? It was and is. It often multiplies the time and effort that is needed to complete a project. A limited number of screen resolutions is an advantage that iOS developers have enjoyed for a long time. Customers on the platform value a pristine look and polish and the competition is very heavy. When someone tells you your job is about to get twice as hard and you aren't getting any more time or money to work on it, it's not such an unusual thing to complain.
     
  18. macrumors 65816

    DTphonehome

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2003
    Location:
    NYC
    #18
    I sort of like Apple changing the resolution up every couple of years. Developers are forced to update their apps to remain current.
     
  19. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2007
    #19
    You should never really have something that is 31x31@2x because the original @1x would be 15.5x15.5 and can't have that.

    31x31@1x is 62x62@2x is 93x93@3x.
     
  20. macrumors regular

    deuxani

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2010
    #20
    You forget that objects will not be multiplied by 1,5, but by 3. Almost all apps are designed at 568 x 320 (or 480 x 320 on older models) and all bitmaps have an @2x extension for the iPhone 4/4S/5/5C/5S (so pixels multiplied by 2). iPhone 6 optimized apps will probably use @3x (so pixels multiplied by 3). If you have an element of 31 x 31, it will be 93 x 93 on the iPhone 6 :)
     
  21. macrumors regular

    SmoMo

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    #21
    A developer's perspective

    Some quick thoughts about this:

    If the resolution increases by 1.5 ( in both dimensions) then art assets will take up 2.25 times the space ( uncompressed ).

    Is the RAM going to increase by this same amount? This would require 2.25 GB of Ram on the new phones.

    ...

    The other way of storing assets is as vectors, and the iOS7 flat style lends itself to this representation perfectly.
    However it takes longer to render the vector artwork, >at current resolutions< , if the resolution increases there will become a point at which the render of the vector artwork is faster than the read/write of the texture pixels.

    Seeing as we're looking at a 2.25 increase in the number of pixels perhaps this transition is about to happen.

    Text is already rendered as vectors, albeit in a round-about way.
     
  22. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2012
    #22
    Yeah, cause Apple is totally going to increase their already retina DPI to win a dick measuring contest with Android's OEMs. Who cares if it increases the size of all apps and reduces frame rates for no visually detectable gain.

    LOL. macrumors logic at its best. In reality, any new display will stay around 300dpi and use existing retina art. Thanks for the laugh.
     
  23. macrumors 65816

    Mark Booth

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2008
    #23
    I think it's funny how many readers will be looking at these examples on a 72-100 dpi display! :)

    Mark
     
  24. macrumors regular

    SmoMo

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2011
    #24
    Ribbed

    Your dick metaphor is flawed, because the rough pixels around the edges would actually help IMPROVE the sensation for the lucky person.
     
  25. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2007
    #25

    You make me laugh...
     

Share This Page