Apple Reportedly Launching Two New iPhones with Larger Flat Sapphire Displays in September

[RMXO]

I switched to the larger Galaxy phones a year and half ago, but ready to come back if Apple finally releases a 5.5 inch screen. I feel it's time for a 128 GB phone too. Give us more options please.

Note 3 user myself and doubt I would switch back to an iPhone if the screen got larger but more choices are always a good thing for customers.

 

[DanCorleone]

@deconstruct60 Steve Jobs died over 2 years and 4 months ago. He handed over the reins before that. Tim Cook owns everything under discussion.

 

[Ted13]

iPads don't make phone calls or text to other phones outside of iMessage....and the iPad is much larger than the reported phone in this thread....it's kind of silly of you to compare the size of the reported iPhone to an iPad.

Yeah, the iPad actually does make phone calls: Skype, FaceTime Audio, and no doubt dozens of other apps allow it to both receive and make phone calls. Same for text messages: besides iMessage there is What'sApp and probably hundreds of cross platform texting apps.

I am not comparing the iPhone and iPad in size, I am comparing the iPhone 4S and iPhone 5S to the rumored iPhones and existing ones like the Galaxy Note and the Gordon Gekko phone which is where we are headed.

Heck, Apple can make iPads compatible with phone SIMs for all I care. Boom, done: you have the largest screen phones in existence, now please leave the actual iPhone alone, or at least offer a top of the line option that is either 3.5" or 4".

 

[Ted13]

do you really believe the majority of women carry stuff in their pockets? Every lady I know owns a purse or handbag, geez even men are starting to use a bag of some kind, their is also holtsters as an option

there is no way any phone company decides their product lineup based on what pocket they can fit into,

I wear men designer jeans and my Galaxy S3 that is 4.7" fits fine in them

Have you looked at women's hands: try operating a phone one handed or taking pictures if it some gargantuan thing.

You should read this: It’s a Man’s Phone
My female hands meant I couldn’t use my Google Nexus to document tear gas misuse

And yes, women put phones in their jeans. Go to a NYC dance club: women don't have handbags on the dance floor, but they do have their phones. Indeed, way back in the 1980s, the surest way to spot bridge and tunnel people was to look for the "dance around the handbag" crowd.

Personally, my iPhone 5S barely fits into the pocket of bicycling jersey - the iPhone 4S and earlier were much better fits.

 

[Ted13]

But ur name is Ted...

Yes, I am man. I'm also married and don't live in a monastery. Furthermore I talk to a lot of women, even occasionally ask them what they prefer. And as a photographer I'm possibly slightly more observant than some of you here.

And to all of you pointing out phablet popularity in Korea: 1) I didn't say Apple shouldn't make a larger phone, I'm just saying they should keep making the smaller one (3.5 or 4" max) as a top of the line model. 2) Part of the popularity of phablets in Korea may have more to do with support for the home team (Samsung) tun a preference for phablets over smaller phones. That is what Samsung makes: if you want their top of the lines phone (Galaxy 4 or Note 2): both ARE phablets. There is no way around it.

 

[Mactendo]

Count me in as someone who wants a larger screen. Quite simply, my eyes aren't as good as they used to be and a larger screen will help..

Bilbo, how will it help you? Icons and app names and buttons will keep the same size as it is now. Apple won't just scale everything up, they will increase screen resolution but elements will be if the same size (or even smaller a bit if we believe these rumours).

And you can already increase interface font size with iOS 7 and zoom content in safari and text readers etc, so how will bigger screen help you?

 

[lordofthereef]

"So what if they quoted 441 ppi?" --> The problem is not that the PPI is calculated wrong, it's that the actual PPIs (555 for the 4.7") would be so high that such displays don't even exist in any phone models currently, which would make them prohibitively expensive to use a screen with such a high PPI, raising manufacturing costs and lowering profit margins, which Apple would not do. So the problem is not the incorrectly reported PPI, it is the fact that a larger screen would require at least a PPI of 474 and 555, which does not yet currently exist in any mass-produced consumer electronic device today, making the probability of a larger screen very very low.

So here is the thing. Larger screens already exist, obviously, from the competition. Staying with this magic number that Apple has created creates one wall problem. They change what "retina" means in every device because you, presumably, are viewing larger devices slightly farther away than you are smaller ones. There is no reason for a larger screen to require 551 (or really any specific) pip except that we are trying to, in our calculations, stick to what Apple has done before with previous iPhone models.

 

[dvoros]

launch

Lets shock the world and release the larger screen iPhone in the Spring instead of the predictable Fall release. Lets think outside the box Apple.

 

[kdarling]

If it helps...

Last summer, LG announced a 1440 x 2560 pixel 5.5" smartphone display. That's 538 ppi.

 

[AFDoc]

If this is true, I may have to hang on to my iPhone 5S for an extra year, and hope that sanity returns by the iPhone 7. If you want a large screen, for the love of Mike, get an iPad.

And no, I'm not saying Apple shouldn't produce larger screened phones for the no taste people out there, but please keep making a 4" phone with the top of the line components every year.

Do any women work at Apple? Have you tried putting a 5" phone in the pocket of women's designer jeans? The current one can barely, barely fit. The 3.5 model was much better. That's half your customer base right there!!!

Please, Apple, step back from the cliff before it is too late!

LoL... no taste because our opinion differs from yours. Ok.

I'm glad they are finally coming out with a larger size, long over due IMHO. My wife wears appropriate sized clothing, including "women's designer jeans" and she has no issue fitting the S4 she uses on occasion in her pocket. Maybe those that are complaining are purchasing clothing that's too small or their bodies have out grown the size they "think" they are.

 

[Renzatic]

LoL... no taste because our opinion differs from yours. Ok.

I'm glad they are finally coming out with a larger size, long over due IMHO. My wife wears appropriate sized clothing, including "women's designer jeans" and she has no issue fitting the S4 she uses on occasion in her pocket. Maybe those that are complaining are purchasing clothing that's too small or their bodies have out grown the size they "think" they are.

That's all well and good, but looking at Ted's post above, if she ever finds herself in some hostile situation involving teargas, she'll wish she bought an iPhone.

...yeah.

 

[Nieval]

Looking at the magic trackpad, I've always pictured Apple using the same technology when they eventually move away from the 'Home' button and adopt bezel-less screens. (Inevitable IMHO)

Think about it, a clickable area at the centre of the screen's bottom border, that takes you home. Maybe even put the fingerprint reader there as well so it functions like a hidden Touch ID, (the iPhone 5s being the buildup to the masses understanding the technology).

 

[trecb]

"So what if they quoted 441 ppi?" --> The problem is not that the PPI is calculated wrong, it's that the actual PPIs (555 for the 4.7") would be so high that such displays don't even exist in any phone models currently, which would make them prohibitively expensive to use a screen with such a high PPI, raising manufacturing costs and lowering profit margins, which Apple would not do. So the problem is not the incorrectly reported PPI, it is the fact that a larger screen would require at least a PPI of 474 and 555, which does not yet currently exist in any mass-produced consumer electronic device today, making the probability of a larger screen very very low.

So here is the thing. Larger screens already exist, obviously, from the competition. Staying with this magic number that Apple has created creates one wall problem. They change what "retina" means in every device because you, presumably, are viewing larger devices slightly farther away than you are smaller ones. There is no reason for a larger screen to require 551 (or really any specific) pip except that we are trying to, in our calculations, stick to what Apple has done before with previous iPhone models.

"There is no reason for a larger screen to require 551 (or really any specific) pip"

You do know that every increase in screen size Apple has ever done on the iPhone/iPad has had a ratio of exactly 1-to-4 pixels, right? There is a specific reason for this.

iPhone 3GS -> iPhone 4
480x320 -> 960x640 (exactly double the height and width, and quadruple the total # of pixels)

iPad 2 -> iPad 3 retina
1024x768 -> 2048x1536 (exactly double the height and width, and quadruple the total # of pixels)

iPad Mini -> iPad Mini retina
1024x768 -> 2048x1536 (exactly double the height and width, and quadruple the total # of pixels)

iPad -> iPad Mini
1024x768 -> 1024x768 (exactly the same height and width and total # of pixels)

The reason they do this is because for every square pixel, you now have 4 smaller square pixels that can perfectly represent that original 1 square pixel. This requires little to no work to make old apps function and look good on the new display. If instead, you had something like 2, 3, or 3.6 pixels for every 1 old pixel, then the pixels would no longer perfectly match up and unintended adjacent pixels would be filled up to try to match the original pixels as closely as possible (though it wouldn’t be able to produce an exact match as it can with a 1:4 ratio), which would cause icons/graphics to look blurry and ugly, and could also cause problems with touch input precision.

If you don’t adhere to that ratio, you get icons that essentially look like this:

This is the reason why a lot of Android apps look ugly / unoptimized - because apps are not optimized for a specific number (or ratio) of pixels for each Android phone.

This is also why if you download a retina iPhone app to an non-retina iPad through the app store (which have a different ratio of pixels, 1:1.28 to be exact), it will show black bars around ALL 4 edges to match the pixel ratio, because if it was to expand to reach either the top/bottom or sides of the screen, the 1:1 ratio would become a 1:1.28 ratio and the pixels would no longer line up, and blurriness/ugliness would occur. Apple prevents this by enforcing black bars all around the app and preventing full-screen upscaling.

If they don’t follow the 1:4 pixel ratio and choose a random/arbitrary/different PPI, every single app developer will have to make a choice as to whether or not spend the time and money required to update all their graphics/images/icons to the new PPI to prevent them from looking ugly/distorted/blurry on the new display. And considering it took many developers (including high-profile ones, like Google and Rockstar) very long to simply update their apps to the taller iPhone 5 size (and there are still some apps that haven’t updated to the iPhone 5 size yet, 1.5 years later), a much larger change requirement of re-mastering all images/icons/graphics used in the app would take even longer and may show a negative cost/benefit for some developers. Additionally, Apple itself would have higher costs in updating all the graphics in their own apps as well.

So if Apple were to maintain the 1:4 ratio by doubling the height and width again from 960->1920 and 640->1280, and trying to fit these pixels into a 4.7” diagonal screen, then the mathematics dictate a required screen PPI of 555. Screens with such high PPIs don’t even exist yet on the market in any mass-produced consumer electronic device due to their high cost, making a larger screen size for the iPhone 6 very unlikely.

Resources:
A Programmer Explains Why Android Apps Are Ugly - see section titled "Dealing with screens of every possible size"

Why Are Android Apps Ugly? - see section titled “Writing for multiple phones”

Android apps worse than iPhone? There are reasons - see "One screen size" section

Why is the general UI in most android apps ugly?

https://developer.apple.com/library...s.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40007072-CH6-SW1 - see section on App Icons and Launch Images

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_scaling

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliasing

 

[vomhorizon]

"There is no reason for a larger screen to require 551 (or really any specific) pip"

You do know that every increase in screen size Apple has ever done on the iPhone/iPad has had a ratio of exactly 1-to-4 pixels, right? There is a specific reason for this.

iPhone 3GS -> iPhone 4
480x320 -> 960x640 (exactly double the height and width, and quadruple the total # of pixels)

iPad 2 -> iPad 3 retina
1024x768 -> 2048x1536 (exactly double the height and width, and quadruple the total # of pixels)

iPad Mini -> iPad Mini retina
1024x768 -> 2048x1536 (exactly double the height and width, and quadruple the total # of pixels)

iPad -> iPad Mini
1024x768 -> 1024x768 (exactly the same height and width and total # of pixels)

The reason they do this is because for every square pixel, you now have 4 smaller square pixels that can perfectly represent that original 1 square pixel. This requires little to no work to make old apps function and look good on the new display. If instead, you had something like 2, 3, or 3.6 pixels for every 1 old pixel, then the pixels would no longer perfectly match up and unintended adjacent pixels would be filled up to try to match the original pixels as closely as possible (though it wouldn’t be able to produce an exact match as it can with a 1:4 ratio), which would cause icons/graphics to look blurry and ugly, and could also cause problems with touch input precision.

If you don’t adhere to that ratio, you get icons that essentially look like this:
Image

This is the reason why a lot of Android apps look ugly / unoptimized - because apps are not optimized for a specific number (or ratio) of pixels for each Android phone.

This is also why if you download a retina iPhone app to an non-retina iPad through the app store (which have a different ratio of pixels, 1:1.28 to be exact), it will show black bars around ALL 4 edges to match the pixel ratio, because if it was to expand to reach either the top/bottom or sides of the screen, the 1:1 ratio would become a 1:1.28 ratio and the pixels would no longer line up, and blurriness/ugliness would occur. Apple prevents this by enforcing black bars all around the app and preventing full-screen upscaling.

If they don’t follow the 1:4 pixel ratio and choose a random/arbitrary/different PPI, every single app developer will have to make a choice as to whether or not spend the time and money required to update all their graphics/images/icons to the new PPI to prevent them from looking ugly/distorted/blurry on the new display. And considering it took many developers (including high-profile ones, like Google and Rockstar) very long to simply update their apps to the taller iPhone 5 size (and there are still some apps that haven’t updated to the iPhone 5 size yet, 1.5 years later), a much larger change requirement of re-mastering all images/icons/graphics used in the app would take even longer and may show a negative cost/benefit for some developers. Additionally, Apple itself would have higher costs in updating all the graphics in their own apps as well.

So if Apple were to maintain the 1:4 ratio by doubling the height and width again from 960->1920 and 640->1280, and trying to fit these pixels into a 4.7” diagonal screen, then the mathematics dictate a required screen PPI of 555. Screens with such high PPIs don’t even exist yet on the market in any mass-produced consumer electronic device due to their high cost, making a larger screen size for the iPhone 6 very unlikely.

Resources:
A Programmer Explains Why Android Apps Are Ugly - see section titled "Dealing with screens of every possible size"

Why Are Android Apps Ugly? - see section titled “Writing for multiple phones”

Why do apps from the same company look worse on Android than on iPhone?

Why is the general UI in most android apps ugly?

https://developer.apple.com/library...s.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40007072-CH6-SW1 - see section on App Icons and Launch Images

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image_scaling

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliasing

This I guess assumes that apple has not found a way around the entire issue in the 1.5 years that have followed the current 4" screen.

So if Apple were to maintain the 1:4 ratio by doubling the height and width again from 960->1920 and 640->1280, and trying to fit these pixels into a 4.7” diagonal screen, then the mathematics dictate a required screen PPI of 555

This claims they require 522 PPI to acheive 4x..

http://www.imore.com/did-you-hear-one-about-iphone-4x-super-retina-display

We've heard off and on that apple has been testing larger screens for some time now, knowing full well that certain compromises need to be eradicated before such a display can be factored into a final product. We also know for a fact that Sharp showed off a 498 PPI LCD screen at IFA 2012 (video in the link below). No one brought a 64 bit chip on a smartphone before apple did on the 5s..whats stopping apple from bringing a retina-2 at 500+ ppi in 2014 especially one based on a technology that the vendor has demonstrated a full 2 years prior to its commercialization by apple? BTW we will also know whether samsung would bring out the QHD display on the S5 which could bring ppi's to the levels that we are speaking off (granted that the display would be AMOLED)..

http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/1/3056490/sharp-caac-igzo-498-ppi-display-prototype

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5zOEf692vY

Yes, issues need to be resolved with displays if apple wishes to retain the same "app expereince" in the 6 as they have had on the 5, however i refuse to beleive that apple would not be activly working on a sollution and looking at the display tech in the market today is hardly a wise thing to do given that apple has a much better idea of whats in the pipeline..

I am not claiming that apple will go 4x or 2x or 3x or whatever, but merely pointing to the fact that "super-retina" @ 522ppi is something that apple can consider given the ammount of money they have and the fact that they have invested in sharp IGZO with the iPad air line..

 

[lordofthereef]

snip

I'm well aware of ratios. I'm also well aware of apples track record. I'm simply saying that it doesn't HAVE to be the way people are claiming it HAS TO BE.

For what it's worth, developers WILL make the time to rewrite apps, assuming their app was profitable to begin with. This is iOS we are talking about. And it's already happened, to a lesser (and different) extent with the iPhone 5 screen.

What's going to happen? My point is, nobody knows. So people should stop talking in absolutes.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Looking at the magic trackpad, I've always pictured Apple using the same technology when they eventually move away from the 'Home' button and adopt bezel-less screens. (Inevitable IMHO)

Think about it, a clickable area at the centre of the screen's bottom, that takes you home. Maybe even put the fingerprint reader there as well so it functions like a hidden Touch ID, (the iPhone 5s being the buildup to the masses understanding the technology).

I agree, it's time for the home button to go.

 

[trecb]

This claims they require 522 PPI to acheive 4x..

http://www.imore.com/did-you-hear-one-about-iphone-4x-super-retina-display

That is calculated for a 5" screen.

A 4.7" screen would require 555 PPI and a 5.5" screen would require 474 PPI.

Though it is an interesting article.

This I guess assumes that apple has not found a way around the entire issue in the 1.5 years that have followed the current 4" screen.

It would be a pretty big deal if Apple figured out a way to change how pixel mapping / LCD screens have worked ever since they were first invented.

Apple had the perfect chance to introduce a larger screen with the iPhone 5. I think it was Tim Cook that mentioned during the iPhone 5 keynote that a lot of thought and passionate discussion went into the screen size decision for the iPhone 5. If they wanted to have a 4.7" or 5.5" screen, they would have done it then, but they decided that 4" was the right choice, taking into consideration the effects on cross-platform app quality and high-PPI-screen component costs, which haven’t improved much over the past 1.5 years. Remember that if the new screen does not have a 1:4 pixel ratio, developers will have to write completely separate UIs for iPhone 6, iPhone 5/5S, and iPhone 4S and lower, increasing development cost/time and maintenance cost/time (and many developers would think the cross-platform cost would not be worth the benefit, or simply won't have the time to optimize their apps to work on each platform).

We also know for a fact that Sharp showed off a 498 PPI LCD screen at IFA 2012 (video in the link below).

Yes, they exist as prototypes or proof-of-concepts/research, but they are not currently being used in any products as they are prohibitively expensive to be used as components. The highest PPI currently being used by Samsung is the Galaxy S4 with a PPI of 441 (more than 100 PPI less than what Apple needs for a 4.7" screen), which also benefits from the fact that Samsung manufactures their own screens, which saves them a lot on component costs - a benefit that Apple does not have. Apple was able to be first with a 64-bit chip because they manufacture the chips (A7) themselves - not so with screens.

whats stopping apple from bringing a retina-2 at 500+ ppi in 2014

Besides prohibitively high screen costs, the battery power drainage and heat emission from a 2xretina would be huge, requiring a larger battery or extraordinary improvements in battery technology, which would only add to the costs, lowering their profit margins significantly on their most profitable product.

 

[vomhorizon]

Yes, they exist as prototypes or proof-of-concepts/research, but they are not currently being used in any products as they are prohibitively expensive to be used as components.

What difference does that make? If the technology is mature enough for apple to use it I'm sure it would be one of the things that would be considered..Its been nearly 2 years since this particular screen was showcased..Remember apple's contract would run in the 100's of millions..Prototypes have a way of becoming mainstream when contracts are this large ..The 64 bit chip on a mobile device also did not exist in practice (perhaps outside of some lab) until apple brought it out. Like I said earlier, I am not certain whether this would be on the new iPhone, but there isnt any evidence that suggests that it CAN NEVER be on the next iPhone. I have a feeling Samsung will break that 441 ppi bubble by quite a bit of margin with the S5 (i think 500 is not out of reach given their display investments and expertise)..

https://www.macrumors.com/2014/02/03/iphone-6-kdb/
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patent...s-igzo-displays-for-the-iphone-6-in-2014.html

Apple was able to be first with a 64-bit chip because they manufacture the chips (A7) themselves - not so with screens.

They designed it themselves, iirc Samsung physically manufactures it if i am not mistaken.

Besides prohibitively high screen costs, the battery power drainage and heat emission from a 2xretina would be huge, requiring a larger battery or extraordinary improvements in battery technology, which would only add to the costs, lowering their profit margins significantly on their most profitable product.

I do not have a breakdown of the cost of the new display technology given a production run running into hundreds of millions..We also do not know the size of the new battery, but it can easily be made larger on account of there being more physical space inside the phone due to a larger form factor. I don't believe that we can take the price of the iPhone 6 for granted (same as iPhone 5) .. A larger phone with more features may be able to command a higher price ..Certainly an iPhablet (although nothing like the size of Samsung phabs) would be more expensive than a standard iphone 5/5s.

I think its pretty much CERTAIN that the next iPhone will be significantly bigger than iPhone 5/5s (most experts, analysts are locked down on this)..it would be interesting to see how apple acheives this and with what compromises..

 

[vomhorizon]

I'm well aware of ratios. I'm also well aware of apples track record. I'm simply saying that it doesn't HAVE to be the way people are claiming it HAS TO BE.

For what it's worth, developers WILL make the time to rewrite apps, assuming their app was profitable to begin with. This is iOS we are talking about. And it's already happened, to a lesser (and different) extent with the iPhone 5 screen.

What's going to happen? My point is, nobody knows. So people should stop talking in absolutes.

You clearly missed

I am not claiming that apple will go 4x or 2x or 3x or whatever

I was just throwing out one possibilty not any absolute path apple will take.

 

[lordofthereef]

You clearly missed

I am not claiming that apple will go 4x or 2x or 3x or whatever

I was just throwing out one possibilty not any absolute path apple will take.

Huh? I didn't clearly miss anything. Why do you say I missed it? Sort of confused here.

Because I said people are speaking in absolutes? Because they are (and the world "people" doesn't necessarily imply you. It was merely a response to your start which wasa. Response to mine. If I am misunderstanding here, apologies...

 

[vomhorizon]

Because I said people are speaking in absolutes? Because they are (and the world "people" doesn't necessarily imply you. It was merely a response to your start which wasa. Response to mine. If I am misunderstanding here, apologies...

No probs..I thought you were saying that i was pretty rigid as far as my opinion on the approach apple will take. I have no clue, all i meant to say was that a very high quality super-retina solution cannot be ruled out just on the basis of the fact that their is no mainstream device out their in the market with such a display. Apple may go for 3x for all we know, or they may take the tough road and ask developers to pony up and re-do the apps..in which case they'd want to do that closer to the WWDC then wait for the phone to be launched..Interesting times ahead!

 

[Cubytus]

Funny as I was reading this old news:
http://thenextweb.com/apple/2011/10/07/why-the-iphones-screen-is-3-5-and-will-most-likely-never-be-bigger-than-4/#!vRl4w

And yes, women put phones in their jeans. Go to a NYC dance club: women don't have handbags on the dance floor, but they do have their phones.

Never seen any girl putting a phone, or anything, in their pants' pockets. That is, when they do have pockets; it's not a given with this current leggings trend.

As most people here, I only see women with phablets, as with enormous so-called "wallets", large enough for 20 cards, cash, coins, and room to spare. Only guys put their phone in their back pockets, and a phablet simply doesn't fit, except in the largest guys' pockets.

 

[MacLC]

I'm one of the few people I know who thought iPod Nano+3G = killer smartphone for the $150 market. It can perform like an iPhone 4S and still run iOS 8 when that comes out.
Apple's marketers really need to start asking customers what they want because I am sure millions of people would rather have a smaller smart phone... especially if they already have in iPad.

Hey Apple, hire me and I'll do that market research for you. I'll start in Japan and Korea where before the iPhone came around, phones marketed to women were getting thinner and thinner (as in narrower) every year.

If this is true, I may have to hang on to my iPhone 5S for an extra year, and hope that sanity returns by the iPhone 7. If you want a large screen, for the love of Mike, get an iPad.

And no, I'm not saying Apple shouldn't produce larger screened phones for the no taste people out there, but please keep making a 4" phone with the top of the line components every year.

Do any women work at Apple? Have you tried putting a 5" phone in the pocket of women's designer jeans? The current one can barely, barely fit. The 3.5 model was much better. That's half your customer base right there!!!

Please, Apple, step back from the cliff before it is too late!

 

[SactoGuy18]

I believe in the end, when the new iPhones are announced, we will get two new models:

1. A second-generation iPhone 5C that uses the internals of the current iPhone 5S--including the Touch ID sensor. It will look almost exactly like the current iPhone 5C model.

2. A new iPhone 6 with a new, 4.8" display in an all-new bezel-free case. It may sport an improved camera sensor, 2 GB of RAM, and the new A8 system on a chip (SoC).

 

[kdarling]

Only guys put their phone in their back pockets, and a phablet simply doesn't fit, except in the largest guys' pockets.

I'm using a Note 3 for development right now, and it fits just fine in either my pants front or read pockets, and in my regular shirt pockets... and I'm a medium sized guy.

Phablets are not really that big. They're kind of small pocket notebook sized.