Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I'm going to venture out a guess and say that this new iPhone will be compatible with AT&T's new HSPA 7.2, and save 4G for the next one...
 
I doubt the iPhone will have batteries the size of those in the iPad ;)

The large batteries are needed to power the larger screen not the A4 chip. The A4 by all reports is very efficient. Driving a screen with more pixels won't change that.
 
Since the iPad has 256MB memory I'd be amazed if the next iPhone had any more -- clearly that's what Apple currently believe is the sweet spot in terms of price/performance. They don't like putting costly parts in their products unless it is absolutely necessary.

It may be possible that the right kind of 512 chips weren't available in time for the iPad. It may be that when the iPad software is upgraded to version 4 this fall, it may also get a memory boost that can better handle multiple programs running.
If that's the case, it will be a similar hurdle that the older 3Gs phone will have handling the extra memory requirements of multiple programs running-- not elegant, with some limitations, but doable.
 
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".

Jesus. I just realised that my iPhone has the same amount of RAM as my VAIO laptop that I used up until just 3 years ago. We don't need half a gig of memory in a damn phone people, not today. If you're running out of RAM, then that says more about the apps you are using
than the hardware. This is especially true considering the multitasking API's Apple has put in place. I had jailbroken my 3GS a while back, and one of the few things I really found useful was Backgrounder (multitasking). Now Backgrounder leaves all processes running fully in the background, yet I felt little performance issues (more from the JB itself).
They have clearly thought long and hard about the sort of software that'll run on the phone today, tomorrow and 3 years from now. For instance, take the original iPhone, its only now losing support for a new OS. When was the last time you were able to significantly update your 3 year old Nokia? Consider how much the original iPhone has evolved since its conception, this is unseen in the mobile industry. Apple have brought many new things to the table in the cellular world, This is what they meant when Steve said:
"Today, Apple is going to re-invent the phone."
Now a virtual memory system is a good idea, especially since all iphones have flash storage rather than slower hdd's. That said, engineers must consider bandwidth issues, compatibility, etc. I'm sure they thought about it, and have their reasons for not doing it. If not anything else, through "constraining hardware" (yet the Jesus phone was lauded for its specs) Apple encourage devs to be more mindful of the performance of their apps, which is reflected on the Developer centre. There is simply no real need for 0.5GB of RAM in a mobile device in your pocket today, or in the near future. Would it be nice? Sure, but the average consumer would never notice the difference, and it would only serve to encourage more RAM usage in future apps, elevating the issue and alienating users of "old" platforms ala 3GS, which remember should support the majority if not all 4G apps, plus multitasking.

EDIT, did not mean to quote you Koach, if my reply seems a little out of place. Was looking at another post.
 
960x640 on a 3.5" translates to 329 PPI. Since a human eye in mint condition is unable to differentiate detail beyond 300 PPI, it sounds like overkill, literally.
The human eye can resolve much more detail than 329 ppi but it really depends on how how well lit, how far away, etc. For the purposes of this discussion, 300+ ppi on such a small screen close up might be overkill but it really depends on your source material.

IPS/FFS also uses more energy than, say, a TN panel so it'll be interesting to see if Apple can pull off both. I would wager on higher resolution first since a super-wide viewing angle really isn't needed on such a small screen.
 
If the memory being 512 is true, that's great news for the new iPhone. Bad news for current iPad owners.

This, is the only meaningful comment in this thread.

If they're ready to go with an A4 using 512 mb of RAM, as an iPad owner I'll obviously be a littler miffed, that they intentionally crippled the first run of iPad in this way. By this time next year, on iPad 4.0 os, I'll be crying for more RAM, I'm sure.

The good news is, the new iPhone won't feel as sluggish in comparison to iPad, as it does currently. In some ways I hope this isn't true, as it means 256 mb really isn't a sweet spot, and that no matter what, 4.0 OS is going to be sluggish on anything less than the new iPhone, since you know the new iPhone will be tweaked to it's last millimeter to take advantage of as much as of at memory as it can.
 
Ah, the old "in order to qualify for criticizing something your knowledge must be equal or superior to that of its creator" argument. I remember it from grade school. Sorry, but you don't have to be Pavarotti to know that Mrs. Miller was a horrible singer. All you need is to not be completely tone deaf.

If you have eyes and a brain you'll know that increased graphics performance comes at the cost of more power consumption and more heat. I'm sure the A4 is perfectly capable of smooth performance at 960x640 resolution, since it's already proven to handle 1024x768 well, but the iPhone doesn't have the iPad's battery.

960x640 on a 3.5" translates to 329 PPI. Since a human eye in mint condition is unable to differentiate detail beyond 300 PPI, it sounds like overkill, literally.


The same engineers who designed the original iPhone 3G? Yeah, those guys built a phone with sluggish graphics and a weak battery, so excuse me for not trusting them this time.

Oh Anuba, first it was the iPhone wasn't good because it didn't HAVE these features, now it isn't good because these features are too much and undetectable by "the human eye". :rolleyes:

How's that iMac that you refuse to fix and curse at Apple everyday for having, the same iMac that your girlfriend uses, did it magically fix itself? Give. It. A. Rest. Troll


PS Don't start in with "I like Apple products" lies. Perusing just one page of your comments and almost every post is in a negative thread about Apple products (such as https://forums.macrumors.com/search/?searchid=20406489&pp=25&page=35 ).

You claim you own a MacBook but yet last year wrote this:

One reason I've always avoided PowerBooks/MacBooks like the plague is the ridiculously low screen resolution. There's just never enough pixels for all the stuff I need on my workspace and I'm not a big fan of ceaseless X/Y scrolling and resizing.

Currently I'm on a Dell notebook with a 15.4" screen and 1680x1050. It's acceptable, but I should have gone with their 1920x1200/15.4".

Apple must have some kind of ppi hangup, because their 15.4" only has 1440x900 (beyond useless) and the 17" has 1680x1050 (OK-ish, but a complete waste of a 17" screen which should have 1920x1200 at the very least).

Now that they've introduced the iPhone with 160 ppi and there are rumors of new icon sizes up to 512x512, might there be any hope that Apple will finally abandon this whole "Xtra Large pixels for the half blind" type deal and introduce higher res screens on the MacBooks?

This quote sums up your stance on Apple, even though you claim not to have a bias against Apple:

Oh, totally. ;)

Hmm. I don't see a lot of reports about the 9C98 being yellowish though. I googled and a couple of comments about a bluish tint (like the one I observed) came up. I wouldn't be surprised if there's some variation, I mean... it's Apple. Cheap crap components inside a deceptively luxurious exterior.

So again, why have you been trolling MacRumors proudly since 2005 with 2,555 posts (and counting)?

...long winded defensive response in 3...2...1...
 
I think this is false rumor that has taken on a life of it's own. It makes no sense to me. The DPI is already high enough and outright doubling it offers negligible benefit except in spec-sheet wars (that Apple never bothers trying to win).

I know we will hear from those with super vision that really need this resolution... You are the Exception.

Downsides are quadrupling of the TFT active transistors (increased cost/power draw), possible scaling issues. Another resolution to target.

IMO many downsides, negligible benefit. Unlikely to happen.

Have you ever compared the iPhone side-by-side with a screen with a modern resolution? It's a huge difference, on other phones you get a lot sharper text, pictures look sharper, you can fit more text on there that is still visible.

480*320 might have seemed like a lot back when the original iPhone was released, but actually had lower pixel density than a lot of dumb-phones that had 320*240. The current iPhone resolution is barely any better than two of those old screens stacked on top of each other
 
I am clinging on to that 512 MB thread of hope.

If all the hardware rumors are true, plus it'll have 512 MB, the new iPhone will basically catch up to premium top shelf hardware phones currently available. That plus the sleek and efficient iPhone OS 4.0 with all the new features (and I'm sure a few yet-to-be announced), I see it becoming a fact that the new iPhone will be the best phone available on the market.

The only competitor will be the evo for it's 4G and the other random nerd friendly features.

Jebus

The only thing this post is missing is the phrase "Operators are standing by"
 
All right! Larger screen resolution :D The downside is that apps will have to scale and developers will have to support yet another screen resolution. I guess Apple will not change the physical screen size since the old and new resolutions have the same aspect ratio.

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.....:rolleyes:


If the screen is directly proportional to the old iPhone (i.e. 960x640 as opposed to 480x320), this shouldn't be a problem.

Since iPhone apps use Apple's APIs for UI and text, apps'll just render it in higher resolution I'd imagine, as Apple will update the APIs. And low-resolution images shouldn't look pixellated since they'll just pixel-double in the same place.

Since the proportions are the same, developers won't have to make any layout changes.

Maybe this is why Apple didn't want Flash as an IDE, since it would circumvent their APIs and prevent them from making these kinds of changes.
 
I think everyone is missing the point... Seams, resolution .... whatever.

This really is all part of a larger crusade by Steve Jobs that began 30 years ago. You see, after watching 2001: A Space Odyssey while on one of his LSD trips, Steve had a revelation. He tried to share this revelation, but was miffed at Bill Atkinson that he did not truly appreciate the geometric perfection of the ROUND RECTANGLE.

It may have taken three decades, but the iPhone 4G is the culmination of billions of dollars in sales, R&D, man hours... prior models have had strange case backs, ugly bevels, the antithesis of perfect lines and curves...

But at long last, at WWDC 2010, Steve (read: THE STARCHILD) will unleash upon the world the Swiss Army Knife of ROUND RECTANGLES...

iphone-gizmodo.jpg


2010 is THE YEAR WE MAKE CONTACT and iPhone 4G (Cue "Also Sprach Zarathustra" by Strauss...) is your new obsidian god of rounded corners with perfect radii.

monolith.jpg
 
This is a wonderful rumor, I hope it′s true. Remember that this iPhone will probably be THE iPhone until summer 2011, so it has to be excellent. There is competition with other phones that are being made.

iPhone needs a higher resolution screen, because now it is one it has some of the lowest res screen in the smartphone market. And I want to see pictures better, zoom more and see more. Now you can see pixels..I am looking forward to this update the most.

512MB RAM would be great. This iPhone will have to be great at multitasking and be able to handle OS 5.0 next year. With bigger resolution, maybe some larger apps, multitasking in various apps ( few websites opened, mail, phone, ichat/skype, opened mail attachments in 3rd party apps..) 512 MB is a wise idea. I am sure the next iPad will have that upgrade as well..

Bring it on! 3 weeks until the announcement, I hope all the rumors will come true. If yes, this iPhone will have as much or even more success as it has had until now.

(I am going to freeze myself, so I don′t have to wait until the release. Someone please unfreeze me on launch day) :D

Maybe it's just me, but I really don't see the need for 512MB of RAM, and a higher res screen. I'm sure the screen res will increase, as Giz stated that they were unable to discren individual pixels, but an increase to 960x640 translates to 300% increase and over 300ppi, thats just ridiculous imo, and unnecessary. Remember, Apple is traditionally focused on selling its products through advertising features that benefit the average user experience, especially when it comes with the iPhone. Stuff that's easy to put across to a wide audience. ie, rather than:
iPhone 4G, Now with 512MB RAM and 330ppi!
something like
iPhone 4G, Now with video calling iChat, better battery life, sleeker design.

I'm honestly expecting more of an emphasis on battery life this time around, considering Apple's R&D in that area for its other mobile products, and the large battery found in the Giz phone. Combined with the new design, a new (but not 330ppi) screen, iChat and OS 4 features Apple will have a very appealing phone for upgraders and mass new market alike.
 
I think everyone is missing the point... Seams, resolution .... whatever.

This really is all part of a larger crusade by Steve Jobs that began 30 years ago. You see, after watching 2001: A Space Odyssey while on one of his LSD trips, Steve had a revelation. He tried to share this revelation, but was miffed at Bill Atkinson that he did not truly appreciate the geometric perfection of the ROUND RECTANGLE.

It may have taken three decades, but the iPhone 4G is the culmination of billions of dollars in sales, R&D, man hours... prior models have had strange case backs, ugly bevels, the antithesis of perfect lines and curves...

But at long last, at WWDC 2010, Steve (read: THE STARCHILD) will unleash upon the world the Swiss Army Knife of ROUND RECTANGLES...

iphone-gizmodo.jpg


2010 is THE YEAR WE MAKE CONTACT and iPhone 4G (Cue "Also Sprach Zarathustra" by Strauss...) is your new obsidian god of rounded corners with perfect radii.

monolith.jpg
haha! I had thought I'd seen the last of RoundRects, but no!
RoundRects ftw
 
The large batteries are needed to power the larger screen not the A4 chip. The A4 by all reports is very efficient. Driving a screen with more pixels won't change that.
I wasn't referring to the A4 chip since that is a known item anyhow, sorry I didn't make that clear.
So driving and processing four times as many display pixels comes for free? I doubt it.
Even if this were so, 960x640 @ 330 PPI? I doubt it.
 
Since the iPad has 256MB memory I'd be amazed if the next iPhone had any more -- clearly that's what Apple currently believe is the sweet spot in terms of price/performance. They don't like putting costly parts in their products unless it is absolutely necessary.

Disagree! Next iPhone has more features like front facing camera and may need the extra memory for video chatting!:)
 
Touché. :p

Which is why I won't buy an AT&T iPhone (zero reception at home). I hope Apple expands carriers to include T-Mobile USA. :)

Why not just buy a (legally) unlocked iPhone? Is it really that difficult in the states? Sure the initial price is expensive, but your contract would more than offset the price anyway. With an unlocked phone, you get to pick your carrier and contract as you please.
 
I just view a higher resolution as an improved feature of an ebook reader. :)

So do I, though that was not the subject of the post you responded to. Just go read it. It's not that hard to understand.
 
I think everyone is missing the point... Seams, resolution .... whatever.

This really is all part of a larger crusade by Steve Jobs that began 30 years ago. You see, after watching 2001: A Space Odyssey while on one of his LSD trips, Steve had a revelation. He tried to share this revelation, but was miffed at Bill Atkinson that he did not truly appreciate the geometric perfection of the ROUND RECTANGLE.

It may have taken three decades, but the iPhone 4G is the culmination of billions of dollars in sales, R&D, man hours... prior models have had strange case backs, ugly bevels, the antithesis of perfect lines and curves...

But at long last, at WWDC 2010, Steve (read: THE STARCHILD) will unleash upon the world the Swiss Army Knife of ROUND RECTANGLES...


2010 is THE YEAR WE MAKE CONTACT and iPhone 4G (Cue "Also Sprach Zarathustra" by Strauss...) is your new obsidian god of rounded corners with perfect radii.

monolith.jpg

I, for one, welcome our new RoundRect monolith overlords...
 
I wasn't referring to the A4 chip since that is a known item anyhow, sorry I didn't make that clear.
So driving and processing four times as many display pixels comes for free? I doubt it.
Even if this were so, 960x640 @ 330 PPI? I doubt it.

Driving a larger display, when done properly will not draw that much power than a smaller display. The entire screen isn't redrawn and calculated every refresh, just the things that have changed.

The only thing that will draw much more power is when you play games, where every pixel is being used.
 
no way in hell

there is no way in hell the new iphone will get more ram. What the heck is the point, the iphone os is very capable and lightweight running on a 3gs and ipad. people are not going to be running more than 5 programs at most for practical sake and lets not forget the ipad which is deemed more superior does not have 512 ram.


The good thing is the screen and the ipad. Finally hd gaming will start taking its course on the idevices and developers will have a reason to finally start utilizing the power of the new devices.
 
Why not just buy a (legally) unlocked iPhone? Is it really that difficult in the states? Sure the initial price is expensive, but your contract would more than offset the price anyway. With an unlocked phone, you get to pick your carrier and contract as you please.
The problem is that T-Mobile USA uses an odd frequency (1700MHz) for 3G data services. The current iPhone does not support this frequency, so T-Mobile USA customers using unlocked iPhones only have access to the pokey EDGE data service. GSM voice service on T-Mobile works fine apparently.

The two other major U.S. mobile operators (Verizon, Sprint) use a different and incompatible cellular technology (CDMA). If you're a Verizon or Sprint customer, the iPhone is a handy paperweight.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.