Sidebar Sidebar
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

brewno said:
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.
Click to expand...

my same thoughts. people need to stop saying what it will and wont have. do anyone of you work high up at apple to know? no u dont. I read iphone wont have this bcuz of that. Or im sorry but there is no way the new iphone will have 512mb ram. People stop it havent the ones who say apple wont, learned from the design of the new iphone?

So I agree with BREWNO here and say if it does have 512mb of ram its due to front camera and video chat.
 
Compile 'em all said:
I type very fast on my iPhone. I have had one since 2007 though, so typing problems on the iPhone for me are non-existent.
Click to expand...

+1

I have had an iPhone since day 1 and a blackberry for work and I can type 3-4 times faster on my iPhone, especially with the landscape keyboard. Typing on a BB keyboard is horrible.
 
Im perfectly willing to make cash (Paypal) wagers on the screen resolution happening in the new iPhone.


Im sick and tired of people saying "it's just too high s resolution, i think they'll go with blah blah blah..."
IT DOES NOT MAKE SEnSE TO USE ANY OTHER RESOLUTION...anything in between the current 480x320 and the new 960x640 just plain doesn't work!! It would require rewriting of all of the apps.

Again, please put your money where your (clueless) mouth is.!


When the iPhone came out...480x320 in a 3.5 inch screen was just as unheard of in the market place. Apple is well known for adopting new technology and making it the norm.

Thank god apple doesn't listen to the prepubescent ramblings all day on macrumors...instead they have intelligent engineers and others with actual insight....I trust their judgment much more than that of a 14 year old whining on a forum about how they don't like the way it "looks" or think the current phone is just fine so there's no need for upgrades...
It's all just idiotic banter..this site mskes my brain hurt.
 
SpinThis! said:
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.
Click to expand...
While I've been a doubter on this 329 ppi stuff, it would be possible to pull it off with a PenTile RGBW LCD matrix increasing the number of subpixel elements by only 167%.
http://nouvoyance.com/technology.html
This would have an added benefit of doubling the display brightness efficiency.
 
I really hope that the high-resolution screen rumor is true--that is the most significant factor in my decision not to buy an iPad, but instead wait for the 4th-gen iPhone. One thing that I do not understand, however, is why Apple decided to go with a physically smaller screen: a 3.7-4" screen would make more sense than a screen that is said to be "a little smaller than that of the 3GS."

Also, there is no way in hell that the RAM is 512MB. It is already known that the phone is based upon Apple's A4, which includes an ARM Cortex A8 CPU, PVR SGX 535 GPU and 256MB of on-die RAM...same exact specs as the iPad, but at a lower clock speed I bet.

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.
Click to expand...
That glorious little chemical played an intimate role in the development of the personal computer, the internet, graphical user interfaces and modern UNIX kernel design...not to mention Steve's slick futuristic industrial design.
 
I think some people are missing the point on why not to buy a generation 1 product from Apple.

It has nothing to do with the product not being good quality. It has to do with the technology and marketing done by Apple.

Apple could've already had 512mb ram and a front facing camera with the iPad. But they didn't. They knew people would jump all over the iPad without these features and then when the shine wore off, they would come out with the next generation; 512mb and camera.

The iPhone gets updated once a year. iPad will probably be updated more often. So the iPhone gets the better technology first. The iPad will follow probably around the holiday season.
 
The RAM estimate is correct - if you recall, the 256MB quotes for the prototype that was disassembled was based on a separate RAM chip, NOT on the A4 chip. if the A4 has 256 onboard, and you add a separate chip into the mix, that's 512. Simple.
 
ChocoboNL said:
I'd figure that as long as the other components are solid and more or less fixed to the back of it, it would not make much of a difference? Or be stronger? I'm thinking in terms of how multiple layers of thin wood glued together are more flexible than one solid piece. Right?
But I'm an economist, not a physician. ;)
Click to expand...

I somehow doubt anyone would send a broken iPhone to the doctors to be repaired.
You're clearly not a physicist. :D
 
knewsom said:
The RAM estimate is correct - if you recall, the 256MB quotes for the prototype that was disassembled was based on a separate RAM chip, NOT on the A4 chip. if the A4 has 256 onboard, and you add a separate chip into the mix, that's 512. Simple.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Can someone else verify this?
 
koopa35 said:
my same thoughts. people need to stop saying what it will and wont have. do anyone of you work high up at apple to know? no u dont. I read iphone wont have this bcuz of that. Or im sorry but there is no way the new iphone will have 512mb ram. People stop it havent the ones who say apple wont, learned from the design of the new iphone?

So I agree with BREWNO here and say if it does have 512mb of ram its due to front camera and video chat.
Click to expand...
If there's any reason to have half a gig of memory, a camera and voice chat ain't it.
 
hefeglass said:
EVERYONE PLEASE READ THIS ARTICLE IF YOU DONT THINK THE RESOLUTION UPGRADE SOUNDS LOGICAL....this explains it as completely as humanly possible...if you still don't get it after reading this, then you're hopeless!

http://daringfireball.net/2010/04/why_960_by_640
Click to expand...
He's still just guessing (he might be right). One could use the same argument for a 960x640 iPad. Apple doesn't always do the "logical" thing.
 
StefSSU said:
If there's any reason to have half a gig of memory, a camera and voice chat ain't it.
Click to expand...

might not be the only reason as to why it may have 512. do you think 256 will handle multi tasking and video chat? 256 might work just enough but 512 may make everything work more smoothly
 
knewsom said:
The RAM estimate is correct - if you recall, the 256MB quotes for the prototype that was disassembled was based on a separate RAM chip, NOT on the A4 chip. if the A4 has 256 onboard, and you add a separate chip into the mix, that's 512. Simple.
Click to expand...


Which prototype are you referring to? Could you link us to that info? That is VERY interesting.
 
Beric said:
Interesting. Can someone else verify this?
Click to expand...

https://www.macrumors.com/2010/05/1...or-256mb-ram-n90-pro2-translated-impressions/

From the article, "the leaked 4th generation iPhone is an Apple A4 processor. iFixit was also able to confirm the Samsung DRAM part number indicating that the next generation iPhone will have 256MB of RAM".

...the article failed to count the onboard 256MB from the A4 (unless they x-rayed the A4 from the iPhone prototype, but you'd think they would mention that). This totals 512. I wonder if there's some shared video RAM going on here.
 
MacAgnostic said:
Nice rant.

I wonder why the iPad isnt 960x640 or some other whole multiple of 480x320.
Click to expand...

Well that's an easy question, because then the iPad would be shaped like a large iPhone (long and thin). The iPhone shape works for a phone, it fits in your pocket. The iPad shape works well for a tablet, you get decent screen real estate.

Apple knew apps should be redesigned for the iPad - it's a different beast. It's no big deal to develop for a different resolution if you're going to make a new app anyway
 
I thought the angle-viewing technology was called In-plane switching (IPS), like in the other Apple products.
 
MacAgnostic said:
He's still just guessing (he might be right). One could use the same argument for a 960x640 iPad. Apple doesn't always do the "logical" thing.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Hefeglass, everyone understands that a screen with 4x the resolution of the current iPhone would be the obvious choice for maintaining backward compatibility for apps, since it allows for pixel-doubling.

The reason why there's still a discussion is that we can't be sure where Apple is headed when it comes to resolution dependency on their handheld devices. First there was the iPhone, then the iPad (1024x768, not 960x640), and every now and then, rumors of an iPhone Nano resurface. Once there's two or perhaps even 3 different resolutions to take into consideration for developers, it's not very far fetched to imagine that Apple won't necessarily be doing whatever John Gruber considers logical.

By extension, he's also saying that the only chance of the iPad ever getting a screen upgrade, would be if they changed the resolution to 2048x1536 (good luck charging $499 for that one), and that the iPad will never have widescreen. Does any of that sound likely?
 
hefeglass said:
Im perfectly willing to make cash (Paypal) wagers on the screen resolution happening in the new iPhone.


Im sick and tired of people saying "it's just too high s resolution, i think they'll go with blah blah blah..."
IT DOES NOT MAKE SEnSE TO USE ANY OTHER RESOLUTION...anything in between the current 480x320 and the new 960x640 just plain doesn't work!! It would require rewriting of all of the apps.

Again, please put your money where your (clueless) mouth is.!


When the iPhone came out...480x320 in a 3.5 inch screen was just as unheard of in the market place. Apple is well known for adopting new technology and making it the norm.

Thank god apple doesn't listen to the prepubescent ramblings all day on macrumors...instead they have intelligent engineers and others with actual insight....I trust their judgment much more than that of a 14 year old whining on a forum about how they don't like the way it "looks" or think the current phone is just fine so there's no need for upgrades...
It's all just idiotic banter..this site mskes my brain hurt.
Click to expand...
"It's all just idiotic banter"
you know just as much as the rest of us, your opinion is no more relevant. Both arguments have their merits, if price/performance were not an issue then Apple would obviously go with the best display available 1000+ppi or whatever. That's clearly not the case, and where that line gets cut is a business decision that depends on many factors, and is thus not so straightforward.
Yes scaling the resolution makes the most sense, but a resolution of 960x640 is unheard of in the mobile market, and that's why some are skeptical. As other's have pointed out, Apple have already thrown out the iPhone's scale factor in resolution and screen size when it came to the iPad (running iPhone OS no less), regardless of compatibility. They may do the same, they may not. I agree that it makes the most sense, but I don't think it makes sense today. It's pretty much given that the phone will have a sharper display, but don't put it past Apple to introduce a new scale factor.
Why then is a resolution of 1920x1280 (factor of 16) unreasonable, if there is no challenge? If you agree that it is unlikely that Apple would use a display like that now or in the near future on the iPhone, then you understand that the same could apply for 960x640 today. It's not open and shut, and you're probably right, but don't reduce other's arguments to "idiotic banter", especially after this:
"14 year old whining on a forum"
 
mcmlxix said:
http://www.dezeen.com/2010/05/17/iphonekiller-by-ronen-kadushin/
Click to expand...

Sexy mallet!

knewsom said:
The RAM estimate is correct - if you recall, the 256MB quotes for the prototype that was disassembled was based on a separate RAM chip, NOT on the A4 chip. if the A4 has 256 onboard, and you add a separate chip into the mix, that's 512. Simple.
Click to expand...

Actually, the Vietnamese phone determined the RAM based on the numbering on the A4 processor. They did not identify any additional RAM.
 
MacMan86 said:
Well that's an easy question, because then the iPad would be shaped like a large iPhone (long and thin). The iPhone shape works for a phone, it fits in your pocket. The iPad shape works well for a tablet, you get decent screen real estate.

Apple knew apps should be redesigned for the iPad - it's a different beast. It's no big deal to develop for a different resolution if you're going to make a new app anyway
Click to expand...


No offence, but that's a stupid answer, what does the shape of the hardware have to do anything with the screen resolution? You see some smaller TVs have the same resolution as larger TVs.
 
knewsom said:
https://www.macrumors.com/2010/05/1...or-256mb-ram-n90-pro2-translated-impressions/

From the article, "the leaked 4th generation iPhone is an Apple A4 processor. iFixit was also able to confirm the Samsung DRAM part number indicating that the next generation iPhone will have 256MB of RAM".

...the article failed to count the onboard 256MB from the A4 (unless they x-rayed the A4 from the iPhone prototype, but you'd think they would mention that). This totals 512. I wonder if there's some shared video RAM going on here.
Click to expand...

Go back and read the iFixit article. They were identifying the DRAM that is ON the A4 chip. There is not a second chip.

http://www.ifixit.com/blog/2010/05/iphone-4g-processor-revealed/
 
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