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.
DigiTimes Claims Display Improvements in Next-Generation iPhone
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nope.
And I don't think it makes sense that the iPhone will have 512MB of RAM until next year. A faster processor, sure, but 256MB is plenty for the half-hearted multitasking iPhone OS 4.0 supports.
While I'm personally a huge fan of high pixel density (which is why I stayed away from portable Macs until the MBP 17" got 1920x1200)... what's the point of 960x640 on a puny iPhone screen? I can easily see this hampering graphics performance, to the point where it will be as slow as the original iPhone 3G compared to a 3GS. It's a 300% increase in number of pixels to juggle. This will come at a cost, both in terms of performance and power draw.
I can live with 512 MB of ram
For examle I can be viewing porn and then the wife walks in the room and bam I can put porn in the background, then when the wife leaves the room bam I can bring up the porn from where I was. Thanks Steve.
For examle I can be viewing porn and then the wife walks in the room and bam I can put porn in the background, then when the wife leaves the room bam I can bring up the porn from where I was. Thanks Steve.
The next-generation iPhone's display will also reportedly adopt fringe-field switching (FFS), a technology that should improve viewing angles and performance in bright sunlight.
Am I the only one who doesn't want my viewing angles increased? I really don't want people sitting beside me all up in my bidness.
this is where reading rumors can be dangerous. if these specs aren't real, i'll be disappointed. if i had never read this, i'd be fine with whatever came out. sounds friggen sweet. i can't wait!
Actually the ipad makes phone calls. I made a couple yesterday on it. There is an App for that.
So how many displays are developers going to have to account for? And what about pricing? Something like:
$.99 for iPhone
$2.99 for iPhone 4G
$4.99 for iPad
I hope not.....
Obvious answer: Apple cannot stay at the same resolution forever. Sooner or later devs will have to learn resolution independence, just like the devs for every other computing device (even game consoles). The screen is almost the only physical feature of phones today, so of course Apple is going to try to stay competitive.
More exciting answer: As devs are increasingly expected to support multiple displays, maybe we'll see less iPhone/iPad double-dipping (or, as implied, soon to be triple-dipping) and more use of the Universal feature.
the extra RAM it's probably due to the front-face video cam for chat. the ipad will have it whenever it has a front face cam... hence the reason it has 256 atm.
Based on what electronic engineering knowledge of yours? Other phones seem able to drive higher resolution displays without issue. What's the point? Far crisper and cleaner text/fonts for a start = much nicer reading experience
Leave the engineering decisions to engineers
Why exactly does everyone assume that the iPad has to have more RAM than the iPhone? It's a different product category not a "iPhone Pro". If it does have 512MB than it's probably because Apple assumes multitasking will be used more on the iPhone than the iPad. It doesn't make any marketing difference to Apple anyways since they don't advertise the RAM on these things.
Not saying I believe this though.
Not saying I believe this though.
It makes calls for geeks, not for Joe Consumer (the person who really counts in the Big Picture).
I know you can throw on Skype, Truphone, fring, or whatever other VoIP app on it. I make free calls on my iPod touch using Acrobits Softphone and Google Voice via my Gizmo5 SIP account.
The iPad isn't a cellphone.
It's awkward in receiving incoming calls since you basically need to plug in mic-equipped earphones and grab the call before it times out.
Absolutely it does, At a higher resolution ebooks will appear much clearer (232ppi) and in fact will beat the kindle which does 150ppi. Also when shooting or playing back hi def content, it'll look a damn sight better. Not quite native resolution but seriously good.
They mention 4.5M in first half of 2010, seeing as they have at best 3 weeks left of the first half, i suspect that's US only and we'll get it in the 2nd half of 2010 ie. July 2nd or 9th.
All right! Larger screen resolution
I don't care if they don't change screen sizes as long as they don't make it smaller.
Yeah, I'd be very disappointed if they don't have a 64 gig model (for the reason you stated, I already had assumed they would double the storage as they had for every other iphone).
But I suppose getting more RAM makes up for it well enough and that would make me happy. But then, what happens if it does have only 256 RAM and also only is available in 32 gigs?
I mean I like what I'm hearing in this rumor, but I've already seen a few posters say that the source of this rumor is not very reliable. And I gotta agree it would seem wierd to me that Apple would let their iphone outshine the ipad in any way when the ipad seems to be their new baby (they seem to want to get everyone focused on that).
You do realise that it's running the A4 which happily flies running a 1024x768 display. Even underclocked it's not going to suffer in the slightest from this.
I am so glad Apple is not going the OLED route. From what I have seen with my own eyes, OLED screen absolutely blow in direct sunlight and outdoor use. While that might not be important to some, it is important if you like to use your device outdoors (ie. touring a city, as GPS in the car with the sunroof open, etc). They are gorgeous indoors but I would rather have an all-around readable screen. OLED screens (IMHO) are about as readable as my old LCD HTC Diamond which could be read outdoors but it didn't compare to the iPhone.
I have an iPad and the biggest issue with only 256MB of RAM is that Safari is constantly reloading old pages when you open new ones. Since the iPhone OS has no virtual memory system, all open windows in Safari have to remain in RAM. So as you open new windows, it has to dump the contents of older windows from RAM, meaning that when you return to those windows it has to reload them, which is time consuming and also removes anything you have typed in on that page, like for example replying to a thread here. Sometimes I can only have 2 windows open, sometimes 5. It depends on how big the websites are as well as how long the OS has been up and how much RAM it is using for the system. I believe there is a memory leak somewhere in the OS because when I first boot it up I can have a lot more windows open in Safari than if I try the same websites after using the iPad on and off for a few days. Also using a utility like "iPad Info" you can see the amount of free RAM decrease over time.
The iPhone OS desperately needs a virtual memory system so that Safari pages can be paged out to disk, especially with such little RAM. More RAM would be welcome as well. This is my single greatest complaint with the iPad, the second being a lack of tabs (which can be fixed with a 3rd party browser like Atomic Browser".
And always someone calling people names from behind a screen. Remark != complaint all the time; get over yourself.
Exactly! Even if a universal price was more expensive it would make it easier to manage for end users to buy it once and have it everywhere.
