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.
Do you want a 4 inch Super AMOLED 960x640 screen with full RGB subpixels in iPhone 5?
- Thread starter wikoogle
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I also think SAMOLED is vastly overrated despite being a darling of tech specs. The black level is great and the Avatar movie has the wow factor but the colors are inaccurate and text looks fuzzy. Until they fix the RGB subpixel thing and tone down colors a bit I'll always consider it overrated.
Colours are far from inaccurate and text looks great. Of course text will look better on a screen with higher ppi.
I guess until Jobs himself is able to use s-amoled in an apple product most people here would always call it overrated.
Colors have been measured to be inaccurate and text is fuzzy not because of PPI - which is fine - but because of the pentile subpixels.
It has nothing to do with Jobs. What makes you think I don't use a phone with an AMOLED screen? Even possibly.... on the Wind mobile network?
Also I have used a number of AMOLED devices in the past such as the Cowon S9 which suffered from similar problems. I certainly would love to use AMOLED more if they fixed the said problems just as the OP has suggested.Colors have been measured to be inaccurate and text is fuzzy not because of PPI - which is fine - but because of the pentile subpixels.
It has nothing to do with Jobs. What makes you think I don't use a phone with an AMOLED screen? Even possibly.... on the Wind mobile network?
Yeah, the pentile subpixel thing is annoying for amoled screens, but it seemed much more noticeable on the nexus one compared to the S-amoled screen on the nexus S & galaxy line.
Nothing beats the 960x640 resolution and 326ppi, but at the same time the colours and black levels of s-amoled are amazing. Combining both of those would really be interesting.
Colors have been measured to be inaccurate and text is fuzzy not because of PPI - which is fine - but because of the pentile subpixels.
It has nothing to do with Jobs. What makes you think I don't use a phone with an AMOLED screen? Even possibly.... on the Wind mobile network?
Precisely.
A 4 inch Super AMOLED 960x640 screen with full RGB subpixels would be the best of all worlds...
Rich Colors
Deep Blacks
Thinner/Lighter
More Energy Efficient (for most tasks)
960x640 Resolution
RGB Subpixels (not Pentile)
Such a screen would be absolutely perfect, and that's why in my honest opinion, anyone that wouldn't want such a display is either misinformed or a fanboy.
Last edited:
Would that not cause problems for developers, if the screen size changes it would be more complicated to makes apps for the iPhone 4 and a iPhone 5 with a 4" Screen
You're forgetting the most important thing, Samsung is cranking out these things as fast as they can for their own devices and the rest of the android market. How is Apple going to get enough screens when their market share is far beyond OLED only android devices already sold?
This is theoretical. If Apple can't get them for the iPhone 5, then hopefully they will be in the iPhone 6.
The poll isn't asking, will the iPhone 5 have such a display. It's asking, WOULD you like it to have such a display. Whether or not it ends up happening now, or an year from now, is beyond our control.
Not at all. Read the OP please.
As long as the screen has a resolution of 960x640, nothing changes for developers. They wouldn't have to do anything. Their apps would work perfectly fine without necessitating an update.
The poll isn't asking, will the iPhone 5 have such a display. It's asking, WOULD you like it to have such a display. Whether or not it ends up happening now, or an year from now, is beyond our control.
Not at all. Read the OP please.
As long as the screen has a resolution of 960x640, nothing changes for developers. They wouldn't have to do anything. Their apps would work perfectly fine without necessitating an update.
Also if the screen was to be biggest wouldn't it just make the iPhone 4 more fragile then it already is
just look at the windows 7 phone imagine dropping that
Why would that make any difference?
You should take a second and think before posting.
The iPhone came out when 3.5" of screen was considered huge, this isn't the case anymore. Most of the iPhone's competition relegate screens under 3.7" to the budget models and sales seem to indicate that they weren't wrong in doing this. I don't see how the iPhone can get a bigger screen. The 4 is already jam packed with components, the screen isn't paper thin and it's not exactly empty space under the blackened portions of the glass. All of the competing phones with screens that occupy almost all of the front are much thicker than the iPhone. If I didn't HAVE to use a case because my phone is made of glass or because my hand shorts out the antennae, I wouldn't mind trading thickness for a larger screen. Having said that, there is nothing wrong with the 3.5" screen as it is, it just could be better.
Well, although that would be the best screen, I suspect the same generation LCD will still be brighter, probably with somewhat better outdoor visibility as well.
They could possibly invest into other companies to foster some competition like they did with Toshiba and Sharp. Apple spent billions with them for bigger LCD production facilities.
Women I know usually find my 4" Android phone a bit too big and prefer the the size of the iPhone or even something smaller. I wonder if a 3.7" or a 3.8" screen would the optimal middle point? Plus Apple still could call it Retina since it'll be ~300DPI. Part of the problem is that the internet forums are full of geeky guys so you rarely hear women's perspective on these things online. Hint for companies: women buy smartphones too.
I think Apple will be happy to call a display Retina whatever the underlying technology is, as long as it satisfy the DPI requirement.
On the contrary, I would be wiling to be bet that it's not the screen size that bothers her, but the size of the Andriod phone itself (Andriod phones are often poorly designed, have a ton of extranous space for logos and unneeded buttons, waste a ton of space and are generally way bigger and thicker than they need to be). Refer to the diagram in the OP, the iPhone 5 wouldn't have to be noticably bigger in order to pack in a 4" screen. Theoretically, it could even be the exact same size as the 3GS, 3G, or the original iPhone while still fitting a 4" screen.
On the contrary, I disagree that there is a DPI requirement, or that there should be one. There is no magical 300 ppi limit. Retina display is a completely made up marketing term. It has no clear definition, and will be used by Apple to market any device they release in the future that they feel has a high enough resolution.
Apple is about to release an iPad 2 with a resolution of 2048 x 1536 which calculates to a ppi of 260, and they have every intention of marketing the device as having a Retina display.
If a display with a ppi of 260 can be considered Retina just because the device has a larger screen, why can't a device with a ppi of 285 be called Retina since the device will likewise have a larger screen?
The iPad won't be the last time you see the term either. I fully expect to see Macbook Pros, iMacs, and Cinema Displays with substantially higher resolutions in the future, and these devices will also likewise be marketed with a term Retina display, even though most of them will not have a ppi above 300 either, despite the substantial upgrade in resolution. The vast majority of laptops, monitors, hdtvs have a dpi of around a 130 or so. I fully support Apple in them marketing any display that atleast doubles that number as a Retina Display, because that in itself is a mind blowingly impressive achievement.
And if you think the average consumer gives two craps about whether the display is 300 ppi vs. 285 ppi, you are wrong. If you're being reasonable, you shouldn't care about the 15 ppi difference either. If the screen looks sufficiently high res and the pixels sufficiently difficult to see, it doesn't actually matter the precise ppi number.
I've tried to see on my iPod Touch and no, it'll definitely have to be bigger. You cannot eliminate the whole bezel even just for usability and it means your fingers holding the phone will touch the side a lot. I still think the 3.7-8 would be the sweet spot.
Of course there's no magical 300PPI limit. That's because people don't listen to what Jobs actually said. Jobs specifically qualified it as the the function of the distance and resolution at which eyes cannot differentiate the pixels. He specifically pointed the distance out as "10 to 12 inches" for the phone. People omit Jobs' qualification on the viewing distance and complain about the 300PPI bit.
If a device has a larger screen and is regularly held further in usage, then Apple will be free to call it Retina per Jobs' description. You could disagree with them but that's a perfectly logical and consistent marketing term.
Not sure the question is a fair comparison.
Given the option of an iPhone 4, or an iPhone 5 which is identical in every way except the screen is a bit bigger, then yes i'll go for the bigger screen. But that's not going to be the option Apple has.
Their option for iPhone 5 (or 6, or whatever) is going to involve trade-off vs keeping the smaller screen. That could be making the phone physically larger, or maybe just preventing them making it smaller - if they decide they don't need as big a bezel, i'd much rather see the same screen size in a smaller, lighter package. If they kept the same size, then the extra space the screenis taking could have been batteries, making battery life worse - not necessarily any worse than now, but worse than it would be if they kept the current screen size.
Basic point is that there is always a trade off in making a screen bigger. If you think they can squeeze it all into the current package - and we know there is no wasted spae in there - then that means that technology improved to the point they could shrink it instead.
So, the poll is meaningless unless you ask if people prefer the bigger screen vs bigger / heavier iPhone or shorter battery life.
David
Given the option of an iPhone 4, or an iPhone 5 which is identical in every way except the screen is a bit bigger, then yes i'll go for the bigger screen. But that's not going to be the option Apple has.
Their option for iPhone 5 (or 6, or whatever) is going to involve trade-off vs keeping the smaller screen. That could be making the phone physically larger, or maybe just preventing them making it smaller - if they decide they don't need as big a bezel, i'd much rather see the same screen size in a smaller, lighter package. If they kept the same size, then the extra space the screenis taking could have been batteries, making battery life worse - not necessarily any worse than now, but worse than it would be if they kept the current screen size.
Basic point is that there is always a trade off in making a screen bigger. If you think they can squeeze it all into the current package - and we know there is no wasted spae in there - then that means that technology improved to the point they could shrink it instead.
So, the poll is meaningless unless you ask if people prefer the bigger screen vs bigger / heavier iPhone or shorter battery life.
David
I would like a bigger screen, sure, but if that means a bigger device then I'm against it. Simple as that. These phones with 4.3"+ screens would be useless for simply because it would be a pain trying to take it out of my jean pockets.
These are sheep that love to get spoon fed what Apple gives them.They are the ones that kiss the ground Steve Jobs walks on. They have lost the ability to be free thinkers. How can anyone be happy with iPhone's tiny screen?
I'm glad the majority want a bigger screen.
These are sheep that love to get spoon fed what Apple gives them.They are the ones that kiss the ground Steve Jobs walks on. They have lost the ability to be free thinkers. How can anyone be happy with iPhone's tiny screen?
I'm glad the majority want a bigger screen.
The insults over differing opinions really need to stop. As somebody who voted 'no' I feel that I must point out that the poll has bundled THREE criteria.
1. 4 inch screen
2. Maintain 2x3 aspect ratio
3. Super AMOLED screen
Point one comes with some trade offs in size and weight that some are not willing to make. These users probably don't stare at the screen all day, meaning that the size and weight are more important. For example my wife is very petite and does not always carry a purse. For her the screen size is non-issue. She already finds the iPhone to be uncomfortably large. BTW, I disagree with the original mock up dimensions. The side bezel is there for a reason and a 4" 2x3 screen will not fit in a device with the dimensions of the 3GS. Even if future tech allowed for little to no bezel, the phone would lose the curved edge and feel larger. Still, in the end I wouldn't mind a larger screen. However the question for the poll don't end there.
Point two. Given the dimensions of pocket-able devices, I don't think that 3x2 aspect ratio is right for phones. changing the aspect ratio would allow for a 4' screen without increasing dimensions (yes, I understand that wider screens have less surface area). See my post on page 2.
Point three is the big one for me. OP talks about a screen size and tech (full RGB) that does not exist at the required pixel density today. So far I am not impressed with the various AMOLED displays that I have seen. Until I see a screen that meets OP's specs (and addresses color saturation/accuracy) I will continue to be skeptical and support IPS instead.
While I agree that developers wouldn't have to change their apps to accommodate a larger screen, I do feel that they should update them as soon as they can. Why have a larger screen if you just going to make buttons larger? I want the UI to be redone to take advantage of the extra space. For example, giving me an extra button on the menu bars or move and scale the controls in games. It would be a shame to see apps fall into the same trap as the current Android tablets where most apps are simply scaled up.
Last edited:
No—I don't. I'm not sure why people are so excited about the Super AMOLED bandwagon right now. I'm happy with color reproduction as accurate as possible (not sure why some people love the oversatured colors on some of these screens) and then there are some of those other fun concerns like battery life, sunlight, etc. (though these vary depending on the level of technology behind the screen). I want color reproduction which is as accurate as possible; sunlight viewing which is as enjoyable as possible. The beautiful screens Apple has been using are terrific—the screen on the iPhone 4 is the finest I have seen on any mobile device.
Don't care about the 4". I'm happy with the screen size where it is right now, but if Apple thought they had an addressable market, good for them, and good for all the people who would want one.
Don't care about the 4". I'm happy with the screen size where it is right now, but if Apple thought they had an addressable market, good for them, and good for all the people who would want one.
The points up there along with insane black levels is exactly why people are so excited about s-amoled displays.
The downside to it right now is pentile subpixel setup.