Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple May Adopt 1704 x 960 Resolution Display for Upcoming iPhone 6
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Wow something is out of the question for you with out even seeing it? Do you always make purchasing decisions based on internet rumors?
Or, it could be that I simply want to watch 1080p videos that aren't downscaled at all. Why is that a crazy idea?
Sorry, when I said TV, I meant the traditional television set. Jsameds mentioned that he/she remembered 'when people said that 1080p was pointless on anything 32"'. Well, that measurement is applied to television sets that you watch few feet away, not phones that you view at about 12 inches from your eyes...
But then what's the use of a move to 3x HiDPI? Only allow to enlarge the screen without losing in pixel density? Most of the time you'd only have everything larger but no more content (Safari as a counter-example).
Using the same resolution wouldn't offer the possibility to exploit the larger screen estate, unless you expect iOS to allow each apps to have two layouts and either "scale" or "adapt", with devs headscratching with the two approachs (two assets of bitmaps for the two cases, etc). So very unlikely.
1704x960 adds little to no benefit, I'd rather welcome a move to 1920x1080 with both a 3x HiDPI appproach and relying on AutoLayout to exploit the larger screen.
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=19008953#post19008953
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Correct. I didn't mean to imply otherwise. I think that's the game. It's not that delver 256GB on board would be prohibitively expensive. It's the overwhelming push for everyone to embrace the "cloud" (future) with the likes of AT&T, Verizon, etc as the owners of the pipe that connects anything to that cloud. As toll masters, they probably love the sentiment of "store everything in the cloud" to which we must depend on their pipes to get OUR stuff. Streams of cash to have access to our own media via streaming instead of sync it in onboard storage.
Apple wouldn't be the only "good partner". They all like the subsidy model.
Because there isn't any visible difference - other than you're watching on a smaller device. At that size, the sharpness difference is negligible at best.
But I'm sure you have "special eyes" that NEED at least 1080p or else the movie/video is crap....
It's b****ing for the sake of it....people need a reason to proclaim their choice better than someone else's, or a reason to bash Apple. Spec sheets have always been the easy way out.
----------
Yup - though you can't "stream" apps. I still think the storage bump is coming.
I prefer the clean and open UI on the iPad. Maybe you prefer to use up every inch of space on the iPad ending a cluttered look but not me.
Again this nonsense ...
1080P is just marketing BS. A 400+ PPI on a true RGB matrix LCD is more than enough unless you are not human
Absolutely NOT, since we are speaking about 400+ PPI on a smartphone, but Samsung told them that they need 1080P so this is a good way to bash Apple ....
----------
Yes, a 4K display on a 4.7" screen ... useful like a fur coat in Miami at August ....
----------
Sadly true ...
Perhaps, given your reading comprehension skills, you should re-read posts before hitting reply -- clearly my purchasing sentiment was conditional. Snarky replies to a straw man aren't clever or cool.
Right, but the displays are also MUCH smaller.
So saying I need the SAME # of pixels in both devices isn't necessarily true - simply the PPI of that smaller device should be higher because of the closer distance.
The iPhone already has a higher PPI than any HD TV out there....it is plenty crisp enough. No need adding resolution and battery/processor strain for little-to-no added benefit.
As for the "take advantage of the larger display" argument, the thing that isn't understood is Apple's philosophy when it comes to what the OS does vs what the Apps do. iOS isn't meant to do the heavy lifting. It provides a framework that is supposed to enhance but not take over the experience of the device. The APPS are where the work is done. Which is why the home screen is and likely never will be more than an app drawer.
iOS users, like myself, always find it odd that Android users tout wanting to stare at their home screens all the time....if I need immediate info, its available on my lock screen. If I've unlocked my phone, it means I intend to use it and will choose the app that best suits my needs. The home screen is irrelevant.
Right, because then we wouldn't have hundreds of "my battery life sucks" threads to add to the lot.....
been expecting 2272 x 1280
Still, 416 ppi is totally acceptable. Just improve (read double/triple/quadruple) DAT batt life!
And keep in mind we are probably speaking of TRUE 416 PPI, not Pen Tile matrix ......
been expecting 2272 x 1280
Still, 416 ppi is totally acceptable. Just improve (read double/triple/quadruple) DAT batt life!
I think that is exactly what Apple is trying to do with this rumored resolution.
300 ppi was the old line in the sand set by the Retina iPhone 4.
Currently it's 400 ppi. Apple is meeting that standard but pushing less pixels, which is going to improve power consumption, because in smartphones the display is always the hungriest component.
We moving into 4K technology and OLED and Apple is looking at 1704 x 960 screen size resolution for iPhone 6 !!?
Who is selling a 4K AMOLED smartphone?
----------
My Galaxy S5 has a 432 ppi with a 1080P display.
I have my doubts that you'll be able to see the difference between it and a 416 ppi display.
Here's the thing though. 3x HiDPI gives a clear backwards-compatibility path that isn't terribly complicated, and gives predictable results with the existing software on the market. That isn't to say you can't use auto-layout for more real-estate on a 1704x960 screen as well. But apps would need to "opt-in" to that mode, much like apps needed to opt-in to the iPhone 5 resolution to tell the OS it was capable of running in the taller screen. So there's nothing really preventing what you suggest with 960.
Jumping to 1080p screws up that plan a bit, as you are now dealing with scaling of older apps in a way that is likely to look worse than just running 3x HiDPI. Not to mention more pixels in your LCD = more battery drain running the screen. While 1080p would fill a tick-box of not downscaling full HD content, Apple has historically cared very little about those sorts of feature tick-boxes. Nor am I convinced that 1080p provides a drastic benefit over 960p. Especially when most folks can't seem to tell when game developers aren't providing their promised 1080p res on the PS4/XBOne.
1080p full HD screen for now.
Lol I guess when the screen is over 32" I will also complain of no 1080
Is adding
Actually the comment is half serious, half in jest, but it was supposed to be taken in a humorous way. There is ample evidence of how the discussions go if Apple it at the top of the specs vs not being at the top. If I don't put the smiley, I'll be reported for trolling, hence my use of smileys and disclaimers.
I come here to learn, have fun, and interact with some cool people. I own Apple products, yet I can criticize the company and don't agree with everything they do.
I know, I know, it's a strange concept.