Do you think Apple is 'arrogant' enough to release a 3.5" new iPhone this year?

[gpat]

The iOS SDK is not quite as malleable as Android, and adding a resolution that is not a scaling of the current one would be rather problematic. Also, a 4" iPhone would be wider, and less comfortable, than a 4" Android, if proportions are kept.

This means that Apple cannot simply decide to make a bigger iPhone because it would either be less comfortable than the current one (and lose compatibility with some Dock accessories) or require a big modification in the iOS SDK, so I think that they will simply go ahead with the 3.5" as long as they can and plan their upgrade to a bigger resolution taking all the time they need, and only when the market really looks fed up with the current 3.5".

That's a pity, because I would kind of like switching to iOS, but I couldn't ever put up with an iPhone screen size. I have a 4.3" Galaxy S2, and I'm thinking about switching to a Galaxy Note.

 

[cynics]

It is not based on that 264 ppi is still retina. I only stated that it must be at least 264 pixels per inch because according to Apple that is really sharp enough. And I know it's from a certain distance, but let's not forget is marketing guys.

My whole argument is based around the fact that they can already produce displays with 264 pixels per inch. It costs a lot of money to suddenly start producing displays with 288 pixels per inch (in case of the 4 inch scenario).

That's why they are going for a 4.37 inch display: that's exactly 264 pixels per inch and it just happens to be that Sharp, LG and Samsung (all the big display providers), are able to produce 264 pixels per inch displays without changing anything right now.

That's also why Apple is testing 7.85" tablets: if they are ever going to produce these 7.85" tablets, than the production lines currently used for the iPhone 3GS can be used.

----------



A bigger display is NOT equal to a bigger phone. It's theoretically possible to put a 4 inch display in the current design of the iPhone 4S.

While neither of us will know till its released do you really think the 7.85" tablet will have the same 163 ppi as the 3GS?

That puts it on par with its competition a year ago they were using on full size tablets. Current competition is better then that TODAY let alone when Apple releases a smaller tablet.

Just doesn't seem very "Apple" to produce a product that is sub par by yesterday's technology when it comes to screen quality.

 

[Awfisch]

Why are big screens popular?

Larger and larger smartphone screens are not being produced because people want bigger. A couple of years ago, smartphone manufacturers tried to mimic the size and functionality of the iPhone. But because Apple had already been developing for years and had already established their supply chain, other developers couldn't match it. They had to start developing bigger screens so that they could fit their hardware inside (4G, other antennae, battery, unnecessarily big processors, etc.). Once they did this, they quickly found that it worked and sold phones. But it didn't work because people wanted bigger screens, it worked for one reason. It made it different than the iPhone. When people wanted to buy a smartphone, they saw all of these different devices that were pretty much the same, so they went with the one that was most familiar, the iPhone. Larger screens however, made other smartphones stand out and look more dominating. Thats why large screens are so popular. I think that when people realize that they don't want or need a 5" device, that will change the game again, but for now, it is working for Samsung, HTC, Motorola...

 

[aluren]

II wonder if Apple released two models, 3.5" and 4+", which one would sell better? I personally think that the 3.5" would automatically be deemed the inferior model if one holds both phones side by side and starts consuming media on it. After playing with many of the Android phones at Best Buys, my inclination was always that Android sucks but if iOS could run on those 4+" devices, I would not hesitate one bit in getting it. But seeing as how I've invested so much into iOS and App Store, I guess Apple can be arrogant and not make anymore improvements on the screen.

 

[ThatsMeRight]

Not missing your point at all. There aren't tens of millions of Apple fans worldwide blindly doing whatever they're told. Yes I admit that on these boards there are some for whom Apple can do no wrong, but they are in a minority and the millions of people buying the phone are mostly new to Apple. If the screen was too small they wouldn't buy the iPhone - they have no brand loyalty and it wouldn't have got the desirability it has now gained.

There are plenty of people on these forums, myself included, who are just happy with their phone and see no reason to make it bigger just to please a small minority who have other alternatives if they are really that upset about screen size. Not because they slavishly believe what Apple says but because the iPhone's design meets their needs.

I'm not including you in this, but these forums have a lot of people who seem to think that Apple should design devices to match their individual needs. Apple is a company, they make and sell products to make (a lot of) profit. If they think they'll make more money by selling more or different products that meet their design ethos - which hasn't failed them yet - then they will.

----------



You know that as fact then? You seem very sure

That's why I believe they are going for a 4.4"-ish display.

----------

While neither of us will know till its released do you really think the 7.85" tablet will have the same 163 ppi as the 3GS?

That puts it on par with its competition a year ago they were using on full size tablets. Current competition is better then that TODAY let alone when Apple releases a smaller tablet.

Just doesn't seem very "Apple" to produce a product that is sub par by yesterday's technology when it comes to screen quality.

That's the only logical solution if it's an "iPad mini": it will either run 1024 * 768 resolution or a 2048 by 1536 resolution, and a 1024*768 resolution it is according to the rumours. 1024*768 pixels on a display with a diagonal of 7.85" is 163 pixels per inch.

And it is exactly very Apple to continue using old technologies. People already said when the iPad 2 launched that the display was sub-par, but they didn't care. Even when the iPhone 3GS launched people said the displays were inferior to that of the competition.

A 7.85 inch LCD IPS display with a 1024 by 768 resolution isn't really sub-par at all.

 

[tanboom]

I know Apple doesn't believe in market research or what people on general think what their products need to be like. But I think the overwhelming majority of iPhone users want a bigger screen for the next iPhone. Now Apple would be really arrogant in ignoring all these people and to continue thinking they know what is best for their users in terms of how big a phone needs to be. If they release another 3.5 incher, it could be their first misstep in a long time which could even lead to them losing some of their market share to their competitors. I sincerely hope they are humble enough to listen to their customers who actually buy their products and make them the success they are.

I don't know if majority want big screen or not. I already quit iPhone because of small screen. If apple repeat it again, I am sure they would loose a chunk of potential customers including me.

 

[BaldiMac]

It is not based on that 264 ppi is still retina. I only stated that it must be at least 264 pixels per inch because according to Apple that is really sharp enough. And I know it's from a certain distance, but let's not forget is marketing guys.

My whole argument is based around the fact that they can already produce displays with 264 pixels per inch. It costs a lot of money to suddenly start producing displays with 288 pixels per inch (in case of the 4 inch scenario).

That's why they are going for a 4.37 inch display: that's exactly 264 pixels per inch and it just happens to be that Sharp, LG and Samsung (all the big display providers), are able to produce 264 pixels per inch displays without changing anything right now.

There is no way that Apple would release a new, top of the line iPhone that does not have a retina display.

That's also why Apple is testing 7.85" tablets: if they are ever going to produce these 7.85" tablets, than the production lines currently used for the iPhone 3GS can be used.

Releasing a low cost version of the iPad without a retina display is actually plausible.

 

[carefreecork]

To reply to the OP, I don't think Apple's (SJ's) philosophy is aimed at Market Research at all as, if I remember correctly, SJ said they did used to do so in the early days. But as they grew larger, and more importantly, the incremental speeds of innovation increased - what the customer felt was 'new' or 'desired' fast became redundant.

I don't think this is an arrogant stance from Apple, but simply a different approach that brought us the innovation early Macs and latterly the iPod, iPhone and iPad. I remember both SJ and Bill Gates said that any products that they are working on at any one time would be released five years later. The iPad was being discussed before any user ever saw a need for one or could envisage what it would be like. SJ spoke at a Q&A in 1997 about the the concept of iCloud without anyone understanding the vision he had in mind.

I put a great deal of faith for these innovators (not just Apple) bringing ever better and rewarding products and experiences to the marketplace.

 

[Xenomorph]

A larger screen could be nice, but I'm actually dreading not being able to fully operate my phone with just one had.

My thumb can reach everything on the screen. I can fully type and reach all buttons and elements. A lot of thought went into the interface.

If Apple does release another 3.5" iPhone, I can just picture tons of NERD RAGE. The stock price may even dip for a day. In the end, it will still probably be one of the better phones out there (if not the best), and they will sell tens of millions.

 

[irDigital0l]

I don't think I want a bigger sized phone.

Bigger screen doesn't mean bigger size.

 

[lordofthereef]

It is not based on that 264 ppi is still retina. I only stated that it must be at least 264 pixels per inch because according to Apple that is really sharp enough. And I know it's from a certain distance, but let's not forget is marketing guys.

It is marketing, marketing that Apple cleverly coined. They aren't going to flush their own terms/definition down the toilet a mere 2 years after they created it...

 

[s15119]

I know Apple doesn't believe in market research or what people on general think what their products need to be like..

No, you don't know that.

 

[ThatsMeRight]

It is marketing, marketing that Apple cleverly coined. They aren't going to flush their own terms/definition down the toilet a mere 2 years after they created it...

They already flushed their retina display definition with the iPad 3.

They can also say: "The display is bigger so people will hold the phone further away from their eyes: at about 15 inches just like with the iPad. So yes, this is a retina display."

 

[lordofthereef]

They already flushed their retina display definition with the iPad 3.

No... they didn't. Simply put, it is defined, since the beginning as indistinguishable pixels from a normal viewing distance, if that makes it any easier.

From Apple's site:

Thanks to the Retina display, everything you see and do on iPhone 4S looks amazing. That’s because the Retina display’s pixel density is so high, your eye is unable to distinguish individual pixels. Which means text in books, web pages, and email is crisp at any size. Images in games, movies, and photos pop off the screen. And everything is sharper.

----------

They can also say: "The display is bigger so people will hold the phone further away from their eyes: at about 15 inches just like with the iPad. So yes, this is a retina display."

I can get ob board with this, however one will not be holding a 4" display significantly farther from their face than a 3.5" display, I wouldn't think.

 

[ThatsMeRight]

No... they didn't. Simply put, it is defined, since the beginning as indistinguishable pixels from a normal viewing distance, if that makes it any easier.

From Apple's site:

----------



I can get ob board with this, however one will not be holding a 4" display significantly farther from their face than a 3.5" display, I wouldn't think.

Again, it's all marketing and they can always define the parameters themselves, but I think we are on the same road.

 

[lordofthereef]

Again, it's all marketing and they can always define the parameters themselves.

Sure they can... that would be a silly marketing step though, IMO, to define something one way and a short two years later redefine it. What's the point of defining anything at all, in any way, if you are just going to change the definition? In short, I would call that bad marketing.

 

[BaldiMac]

Again, it's all marketing and they can always define the parameters themselves, but I think we are on the same road.

The did define it themselves. They are not going to drop the top of the line iPhone's pixel density by over 60 ppi (almost 20%). That's significantly less than the larger Galaxy Nexus.

 

[itjw]

Ultimately Apple will do whatever Apple WANTS to do, and it will do it successfully... for all of the grief (and there was a LOT of it) surrounding the 4S (no 5), the 4S has been incredibly successful and FAR from what anyone would consider a "mis-step".

IF Apple does come out with a larger screen, it will be accepted as the "perfect" size. There is NO reason for them to release it because of forum pressure. And that's all it is. I must have missed all of the "Apple struggling" headlines. They aren't... most of this "users want" crap is 100% due to the magnifying glass of the INTERNET. Just like antennagate, batterygate, firepadgate, etc... The internet takes a few legitimate cases and makes it seem like everyone has the problem.

I love the 3.5" screen. It's great. If a 4" screen came along, I'd try it, and if I liked it, I'd buy it. If I didn't like it, I WOULDN'T BUY IT. The beauty of being an adult with my own money supply is that I can buy things that I want (regardless of whether or not some troll told me it wasn't good for them).

If they keep the 3.5" screen (which I really hope they do, just to see people go BONKERS over the "arrogance"), I will be weighing the up's and down's and deciding if it will be a worthy upgrade FOR ME.

If there comes a time when the iPhone is slumping, and the reason is clear as day, Apple will change it. Don't think for a second we are anywhere NEAR that point though. Apple can do no wrong. Arrogant or not, it's the reality of the last 10 years. If you don't like the iPhone 5: DON'T BUY IT. If you buy an iPhone 5 and don't want it: BRING IT BACK.

I can see that guy doing the same song again ...

The person waiting in LINE for the privelege of buying it will gladly take it off your hands. Apple will address what it wants to. Nothing short of a disaster will hurt the sales of the 5. That's the beauty of reputation. There would be lines around city blocks even if they decide to SHRINK the screen.

 

[DodgeV83]

What about those of us who have used Windows and Android phones but choose the iPhone instead? Those of us who have researched and owned other platforms but still choose an iPhone? Screen size isn't everything to everyone and many people prefer a phone to be a smaller size device. Plus, the 4s was faster than the top Android phones in benchmarks, had a higher resolution with more ppi, a far better ecosystem and better build quality. Its just been in the last month that these brand new Android phones have started to get better CPU performance and higher resolution. That should swing back in Apple's favor when the new iPhone hits though. So yea, some people choose the iPhone cause its the superior device.

Looking at Anandtech.com benchmarks, no phone has yet beaten the iPhone 4S in any CPU/GPU benchmark. Some beat the iPhone 4S in a JavaScript benchmark, but that's browser dependent.

 

[lordofthereef]

Ultimately Apple will do whatever Apple WANTS to do, and it will do it successfully...
The person waiting in LINE for the privelege of buying it will gladly take it off your hands. Apple will address what it wants to. Nothing short of a disaster will hurt the sales of the 5. That's the beauty of reputation. There would be lines around city blocks even if they decide to SHRINK the screen.

I snipped this, just so I wouldn't be quoting all of your text....

To some extent, I agree that the next phone will sell well almost regardless of what is done to it. The thing is, they still wouldn't want to give us a product that we don't really want. That would make the sales of the next iPhone (the one following this one coming out in the fall) to crash and burn. Reputation isn't everything. If you launch a bad product, people will figure it out.

 

[cynics]

Looking at Anandtech.com benchmarks, no phone has yet beaten the iPhone 4S in any CPU/GPU benchmark. Some beat the iPhone 4S in a JavaScript benchmark, but that's browser dependent.

Apples domination of benchmarks should make anyone question the methods of testing.

I've found it's mostly the optimization of the app you are using to test. It's to hard to find side by side comparisons of identical apps on opposing OS's to have a fair result.

Like we talked about before linpack to a major his on ios after an update. I found even the ad running in the app effects it performance.

 

[ThatsMeRight]

Looking at Anandtech.com benchmarks, no phone has yet beaten the iPhone 4S in any CPU/GPU benchmark. Some beat the iPhone 4S in a JavaScript benchmark, but that's browser dependent.

Wow, this rarely happens. So first you say that the iPhone 4S has yet to be beaten in any benchmark and already in the next sentence you already state that the iPhone 4S has been beaten in the JavaScript benchmark.

 

[BaldiMac]

Wow, this rarely happens. So first you say that the iPhone 4S has yet to be beaten in any benchmark and already in the next sentence you already state that the iPhone 4S has been beaten in the JavaScript benchmark.

It seems more confusing when you change what he actually said.

His first claim was any CPU/GPU benchmark, which he clearly differentiated from the Javascript benchmark which is "browser dependent".

 

[mbell1975]

Looking at Anandtech.com benchmarks, no phone has yet beaten the iPhone 4S in any CPU/GPU benchmark. Some beat the iPhone 4S in a JavaScript benchmark, but that's browser dependent.

The Galaxy Nexus is the only Android phone I have seen tested that beat the 4s in CPU, and it was by a slim margin. However, the Nexus got hammered in GPU tests against the 4s.

 

[DodgeV83]

The Galaxy Nexus is the only Android phone I have seen tested that beat the 4s in CPU, and it was by a slim margin. However, the Nexus got hammered in GPU tests against the 4s.

Thanks BaldiMac, I was hoping ThatsMeRight would recognize his/her mistake

mbell1975, the only benchmarks I could find comparing the two, didn't include anything CPU based. Where did you find that the Nexus beat the 4S in a CPU based benchmark?

cynics, I did not consider the benchmark itself could be biased, will look into that. I was under the impression that the benchmarks are very simplistic apps, and no OS optimization was done. I'm sure it's been discussed before, have any sources I can check out?