Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Why can't the next iPhone have a wider display?

oops new page
oneMadRssn said:
You say this like it's insignificant. ~.5" is an extra row of icons, and 3-5 extra lines of text (depending on font size)
Click to expand...

I don't see having an extra row of icons as a benefit. That would mean more apps per page/less pages of apps, ok, but it then would make it even harder to search visually for an app on a page.
Plus, i spend more times in apps than on the icon grid. That's not frankly the best reason for a vertical growth i would give.

The 1440x960@440ppi example screen means a .24 inch increase in width and .32 inch in height.

The higher pixel density would allow drawing characters at the same physical size as on actual iPhone screens, thus providing more chararacters per line and more lines.

Text is not the only kind of data displayed on screens.
When pictures and text are mixed, more space in width is welcome.

I've been too lazy to do mockups showing the difference with a 16:9.
I think I'll have to do it too, if you don't before, to help better visualize the result.
 
Last edited:
My question is if they did keep the same aspect ratio and made the screen wider as well would it make the actual text bigger on the screen or would you just be able to see more of it. I ask this because I noticed when I had the HTC One X that on mobile sites the text was no bigger on the One X than it was on the iPhone. They just were able to fit more on the screen. I've included a pic of what I'm talking about. Would this happen if the iPhone is wider or would it everything just increase in size?
 

Attachments

  • iPhone vs One X.JPG
    iPhone vs One X.JPG
    483.9 KB · Views: 92
totally agree

I totally agree. The iPhone is not just a phone. If it were, then keep it the same size. However, it was built to be a data collector, search engine, project creator (pages, keynote, numbers, iMovie, etc.) and hence a wide screen size is needed. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to realize this.

nw9 said:
You are not considering when people browse websites. A larger overall screen will make text larger and the website less squeezed into a small screen. Also when people use the iPhone in landscape mode there still won't be any extra screen room height benefits. A taller screen only benefits portait orientation while a screen that is both taller and wider benefits both. I woud use landscape orientation more of it was wider which makes it taller.

Your 3:2 image example is only a modest increase in size. I would like it to be a little bit larger than that if they kept the same aspect ratio. It would make everything overall bigger so that it's easier to see details and read larger texts. It's the same reason why people want larger screen TVs rather than just a stretched TV.
Click to expand...
 
mjpearce023 said:
My question is if they did keep the same aspect ratio and made the screen wider as well would it make the actual text bigger on the screen or would you just be able to see more of it. I ask this because I noticed when I had the HTC One X that on mobile sites the text was no bigger on the One X than it was on the iPhone. They just were able to fit more on the screen. I've included a pic of what I'm talking about. Would this happen if the iPhone is wider or would it everything just increase in size?
Click to expand...

That is interesting. Hard to say, without having seen that picture, I would have said yes, I think the text would be bigger.

----------

Found this on google... I think it looks pretty good. Seems to mix the iPad 2/3 with the iPhone 4/4S. Using the aluminum back, with a small section for the antenna. I like it.

Apple-iPhone-5-by-Michal-Bonikowski-thumb-550xauto-65598.jpg


----------

Add a 4.3" screen, LTE, A6 Quad Core, 3:2 Aspect, and a Battery that out performs the iPhone 4 (while using LTE)... and they can have my money up front.
 
JS82712 said:
you do realize there are many girls who struggle to hold a phone that's bigger than 4"?
Click to expand...
That's your opinion, which is fine.
lazard said:
and there are many that use the Galaxy S3 without a problem.
Click to expand...
This is what I see in the University Town I live in... lots of Girls, and Women that love their full size Galaxy S III, or HTC One X, or other top of the line Android phones. They are as popular on campus as iPhones are. It was a real eye opener this year, as opposed to last year before these really good Androids were available. The predominate smartphone last year was iPhone, this year it's so close it appears there's an equal number of Androids and iPhones.
skidbubble said:
Yes, there may be girls who struggle but the iPhone is not marketed or targeted specifically for girls.

And you don't ave to resort to childish name calling, insults, and insulting pictures in your rebuttals. When doing so, you are taken less seriously.
Click to expand...
I could not agree more.

Sadly the childish game players and haters post these stupid juvenile pictures that reveal just how easily amused these pranksters are. Only on an iPhone forum do you see such a blatant display of foolishness.
 
Image

----------

Add a 4.3" screen, LTE, A6 Quad Core, 3:2 Aspect, and a Battery that out performs the iPhone 4 (while using LTE)... and they can have my money up front.[/QUOTE]

I can't for the life of me think why Apple won't go down this route. A curved aluminium back would be much more ergonomic than what we've got currently, and would be much more durable to boot. Plus, with the external antenna we no-longer have to worry about block signals.

Marry that design with a 4.3"/4.7" screen and you're onto a winner.
 
ixodes said:
This is what I see in the University Town I live in... lots of Girls, and Women that love their full size Galaxy S III, or HTC One X, or other top of the line Android phones. They are as popular on campus as iPhones are. It was a real eye opener this year, as opposed to last year before these really good Androids were available. The predominate smartphone last year was iPhone, this year it's so close it appears there's an equal number of Androids and iPhones.
Click to expand...

Yea, I have never understood the argument about girls and wanting smaller phones... I know plenty of girls with the Galaxy S3 and the Galaxy Note.

My girlfriend has an iPhone 4 with an Otterbox Defender case... Since it is always in her purse, the bulk does not bother her at all.

Remember the "Side Kick", that phone where the screen flipped... It was huge, almost reminded me of the old Sega GameGear (when the phone's screen was down). I knew tons of girls who had that phone, and i did not know a single guy who had one.
 
I wholeheartedly 10000% agree!!! I don't remember if I posted on this thread because I've been to so many threads talking about how I wish the new iPhone had a bigger and wider display!! but if I did, I would like to reiterate, bigger screen please! :D
 
The people arguing that a wider/larger screen will hurt sales among women need to realize that once the new iPhone comes out, it's not like they will stop selling the 4/4S any time soon. People will have two size choices. If you like the big screen you get the big phone, if you like the small screen you get the small phone.

This works put perfectly for Apple...they give a larger screen to those that want one, but don't alienate the ones who prefer a smaller phone (many of whom will be less concerned about having the newest, fastest processor).

And they can do their marketing research as they go, based on sales. If the 4/4S sales dwindle, they can ditch it sooner rather than later. If the sales stay high they can keep a small phone available and even upgrade the hardware down the road.
 
chleuasme said:
oops new page


I don't see having an extra row of icons as a benefit. That would mean more apps per page/less pages of apps, ok, but it then would make it even harder to search visually for an app on a page.
Plus, i spend more times in apps than on the icon grid. That's not frankly the best reason for a vertical growth i would give.

The 1440x960@440ppi example screen means a .24 inch increase in width and .32 inch in height.

The higher pixel density would allow drawing characters at the same physical size as on actual iPhone screens, thus providing more chararacters per line and more lines.

Text is not the only kind of data displayed on screens.
When pictures and text are mixed, more space in width is welcome.

I've been too lazy to do mockups showing the difference with a 16:9.
I think I'll have to do it too, if you don't before, to help better visualize the result.
Click to expand...

iphone.png


I edited your image a bit, I added the beginning of Alice In Wonderland all in 12pt Helvetica to those screens, stretching the border of the text to the edges of the screen. I assumed this mockup was to scale to begin with.

Both the 4" 16:9 and 3:2 show more text than the 3.5" 3:2; that's a no brainer. The 4" 3:2 shows only a few more words than the 4" 16:9. So for reading emails, websites, and ebooks I think the result is that both options are just about equal, with the 3:2 option having a very slight advantage.

However (my image editing skills are lacking to say the least), most of iOS apps work in a "list" mode, where you scroll up and down in a list that contains short bursts of information (ex. Yelp, Music, Fandango, Weather.com, Twitter, Facebook, OpenTable, etc). Being able to show an extra list item or an extra row at the same time makes the 4" 16:9 option advantageous for these uses. You said yourself you spend more time in apps than in the grid, this will let the apps show more within being "bigger".
 
Because its the Apple way and you guys wanted it that way when this all started.
 
Sorry, only seen your post today, i was not on forum last few days.

oneMadRssn said:
I edited your image a bit
Click to expand...
note: i did not post that image, i only quoted it ;) it was Technarchy

oneMadRssn said:
I added the beginning of Alice In Wonderland all in 12pt Helvetica to those screens, stretching the border of the text to the edges of the screen. I assumed this mockup was to scale to begin with.

Both the 4" 16:9 and 3:2 show more text than the 3.5" 3:2; that's a no brainer. The 4" 3:2 shows only a few more words than the 4" 16:9. So for reading emails, websites, and ebooks I think the result is that both options are just about equal, with the 3:2 option having a very slight advantage.
Click to expand...
I personally find really hard to read (long) texts on actual iPhones screens (typically e-mail, web pages, iBooks); not only because not a lot of text can be displayed, but especially because lines are really too short, it breaks reading.
Even if the 16:9 screen could display as many text as the larger 3:2, it still would be harder to read on it.

Little critic on your picture: most of the text i read on my device is using a smaller font. In iBooks, on average 40 char per line seem to be displayed; in your picture, it's around 20.

Here is an other example with the same text, with adjusted font and size:



oneMadRssn said:
However (my image editing skills are lacking to say the least), most of iOS apps work in a "list" mode, where you scroll up and down in a list that contains short bursts of information (ex. Yelp, Music, Fandango, Weather.com, Twitter, Facebook, OpenTable, etc). Being able to show an extra list item or an extra row at the same time makes the 4" 16:9 option advantageous for these uses. You said yourself you spend more time in apps than in the grid, this will let the apps show more within being "bigger".
Click to expand...
Most of lists contains icons or images, with text on side. Look at the mockup you based your image on, for example.
Each element list on this example would use the wider screen to display text on less lines and then imply less vertical space needed (and enhance reading, as more words per lines could then be displayed).

Well, that's just an example, and I'm sure it's possible to find one showing 16:9 will be superior.
3:2 only appears to be most of the time superior or equal.
 
Last edited:
chleuasme said:
A 4" 16:9 screen would be about an 18% surface increase.
A 4" 3:2 screen would be over a 23% surface increase.

Now, it is not enough to say this, it all depends on the real metric, that is, the pixel density.

If more lines can be displayed on the more elongated 16:9, each lines on the 3:2 4" would allow to display more characters (if font size adjustement to display characters at the same physical size), and so less lines to display the same text content.

I already posted in some other thread this example of a 3:2 3.93" screen.
Compared to the rumored 1136x640 screen at 326 ppi, such a screen hold the comparison on content area gain.

For example, one argument for a 16:9 screen often given is the benefit of the elongated ratio when the keyboard is displayed on screen. Indeed, the keyboard would be exactly the same as on the actual 3:2 screen (in portrait, 216 pts tall = 432 pixels on retina iPhone) and the pixels added vertically allow more data to be displayed.
Typically, keyboard displayed on an app like Pages, with status bar and toolbars, only allow a content area of 400x640 pixels (at 326 ppi). On the 16:9 screen, it then would measure 576x640 and so an increase of 44 % of content area.

On the 1440x960 at 440 ppi 3:2 screen, iOS could display the keyboard at the same physical height as it is on the actual resolution (584 pixels tall at 440 ppi in portrait, no vertical expansion) while each key could be a bit wider/a bit more spaced, as the screen grew in width. Similarly, status bar and toolbars could be displayed at the same height as on an actual iPhone. The content area would measure 684x960 pixels (at 440 ppi), and so a content area gain of 41 %.

Not so bad.
Click to expand...
Alright, it's always better with a picture :p



If I'm not too lazy, i'll make the landscape version later :D
 
And the Landscape version:

chleuasme said:
more interesting in landscape
Click to expand...





Well, with these 3 last examples/pictures,
I don't see the 4" 16:9 screen adding enough value, keeping the same too small width as now.
If Apple goes 16:9, I'd prefer they'd go wider too: a 4.4" 16:9 screen is about as wide as a 4" 3:2 (still about the same 5 or 6 mm more). The problem is such a screen becomes really too tall, the whole device would become too big (for my taste).

The 4" 3:2 option still seems to me the best solution, offering a substantially larger screen and a bit wider, allowing to keep the phone at a reasonable size.
The 440 ppi example is maybe a bit too much; 1080x720@326 ppi gives a 3.98" screen, too.


Well all these discussions suppose some auto layout magic in iOS would be there to help developers support a second resolution.
 
Last edited:
Don't worry. This year Apple will add a horizontal row of icons. In two years they will add a vertical row and the screen ill be almost like what Android phones have.
 
Last edited:
lilo777 said:
Don't worry. This year Apple will add a horizontal row of icons. In two years they will add a vertical row and the screen ill be almost like what Android phones have.
Click to expand...

LOL That's exactly what will happen, always playing catch up. But iSheep will still come out in record numbers and purchase
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back