Future iPhone with 1080p display

Discussion in 'iPhone' started by VinegarTasters, Nov 22, 2012.

  1. VinegarTasters, Nov 22, 2012
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2012

    VinegarTasters macrumors 6502


    Nov 20, 2007
    Apple needs people who can think ahead, not just good design. It also needs to put performance and quality control as priority one. No one plays games on mac because it is too slow compared to windows for the same game. The OS has slow objective-c and lots of virtual machine code that prevents it from outperforming a windows machine that use C/C++ or assembly. Even though microsoft adds in SLOW .NET, at least the lower layers use C/assembly, so apps can run on top of them, and people who don't care for performance can load in the .NET layers (ON TOP OF operating system). For apple, the slowest layers ARE IN THE OPERATING SYSTEM! This is stupid, as stupid as what android is doing with SLOW Java being the OS layer (which will bite them in the end when Windows Phone starts getting good apps).

    Thinking ahead means you need someone who understands technology. A good designer can probably design something you like to look at (like a car). But if the engine is not good, nobody will buy it. Just like if a Mac Book Pro looks nice, but with a buggy and slow OSX Mountain Lion, people want to throw the OS away and install something better (windows?). Just like the NeXT computer, good design, terrible optical drive speed that killed it. Performance is important. Good quality control is important. Good technological direction is important.

    For example, lets look at display technology:

    1080p should be the minimum of all smartphone displays. In fact, at 440 ppi, viewing it at over 12 inches viewing distance (way over normal holding distance), you can still see the individual dots. So 5 inches at 440 ppi is great but it offers room for more improvement.

    With normal 7-8 inches viewing distance, at 900 ppi, you can just barely see the dots. And guess what? 880ppi, is double 440ppi of the 5 inch. And with 4k just around the corner... You can have 4k in 5 inches using 880 ppi, and that would be perfect for a display in the future to match the 4k television sets and movies coming out.

    But lets say technology is not catching up fast enough. Then we can use the current 440 ppi to make a 10 inch tablet display. It would fit into 10 inches diagonal, perfect for a tablet computer with 4k resolution.

    Current monitors and TV's are selling full HD minimum resolution. Movies are being released at 1080p minimum. In 3 years time people will start moving to 4k resolution televisions. To meet technological progress, smartphones should be 1080p at 5 inches diagonal now! And a tablet should be 4k resolution at 10 inch diagonal in 3 years time. These are the resolutions that all companies that make displays should aim for.

    With paper printers making 1400+ dpi common, stopping at 326 ppi of the retina display is slowing progress. dpi and ppi are the SAME thing. In fact, many monitors manufactures will substitute dpi instead of ppi. Pixel is dot. Dot is pixel. The iPhone is last years technology if it stays with 326ppi. The closer you move a display to your face, the more ppi/dpi is required. In fact the reason 1400dpi is common is that when people are examining things in detail, they will move it within 6 inches of their eyes. 1400+ is needed to so they won't see "dots". So I would say close to 1000ppi should be standard for all displays in 5 years time, and premium displays would aim for 1400+, matching whatever the printers are aiming for.

    In fact, they shouldn't even be aiming for 1000ppi 2D displays. They should go full holographic 3D displays. If you have seen a holograph sticker, you can move left and right and it should rotate with your eyesight. Nintendo 3DS has this. You can even make it vertical 3D as well (so full 3D left right, up down). These displays require even more pixels. 2000ppi would allow you to get a good 3D holographic display with barely enough good size for viewing in front of you. But because technology is not moving fast enough, we probably need ANOTHER 8 years, unless someone thinks ahead and aims for it RIGHT NOW! Full 3D (up down left right) holograph color stickers were out over 20 years ago! Why are there STILL no displays able to produce full 3D without glasses? (that includes up and down 3D). The technology movers are TOO SLOW! They could land on the moon in 10 years time, but in 20 years time they STILL CAN'T replicate on display what they can on paper.
  2. XboxMySocks macrumors 68020


    Oct 25, 2009
    Shut up.
  3. 12dylan34 macrumors 6502a

    Sep 3, 2009
    Everything that you've described isn't Apple, never was Apple, and probably never will be Apple. They do what's important to them, then make it so people want to buy it.

    Maybe a switch to Windows, Android/Windows Mobile should be in your future. What you say just isn't what Apple does. Go with a company that will shove all the latest in greatest in just for the hell of it.
  4. ChrisMan287 macrumors 6502


    Nov 18, 2012
  5. dkersten macrumors 6502a

    Nov 5, 2010
    Yes Apple needs to move forward. However you vastly over estimate the pace that technology is moving. There is absolutely no reason you need a 4k 5 inch screen now. That would kill battery life and you would not see too much of a benefit.

    BTW ppi does not make a screen look good. Just look at Android phones who's screens do not look as good as the iPhone but have a higher resolution. Apple doesn't need to turn into a spec whore to innovate. At this point with current technology its all about software, integration, and services for Apple.
  6. sillywabbit macrumors 6502a

    Nov 10, 2012
    That is because Apple is known to play "catch up" while its competitors are considered "innovative".

  7. duneriderltr450 macrumors 6502


    Sep 20, 2012
  8. lunaoso macrumors 65816


    Sep 22, 2012
    Boston, MA
    Umm... I'm pretty sure you can't see the individual dots 12 inches away at 440 ppi. We don't need 900 ppi screens. After a certain resolution, your eyes can barely tell the difference anyway. 4k in a 4 inch screen is just a terrible idea. Why don't we just put a monster truck engine in a Prius too? That will be the industry standard soon so might as well?
  9. VinegarTasters thread starter macrumors 6502


    Nov 20, 2007
    You are thinking limitation, rather than progress. Nobody agrees today when Bill Gates said 640k was enough for computers. That was a limitation thought. Just because you can't imagine it would be needed does not mean it shouldn't be. If that was the case, why try to travel around the world to find out it is not flat? Why even try to fly to get airplanes?

    Just because battery technology of Lithium ion can't support long battery life, does not mean other battery technology can't be used. In fact, there are now so many different type of display technology coming out, you can't even say holographic 3D displays are not gonna happen. Yes, for TV 3D displays are kinda stupid (you are seated in one place, so you don't get any 3D effects). But if you have a smartphone or tablet in front of you, you can manipulate angles. Imagine a screen with a 3D operating system. You swipe your fingers across it to turn the 3D image, or slowly rotate your hand holding the smartphone to view different angles of a statue display in front of you. Of course this is if Google's projection immersive 3D displays are not fast enough in coming up with projection 3D holographic displays.

    Maybe in the future power can be projected into your device, so you don't even need to worry about battery life. Do you know that the Curiosity Rover can probably last a lifetime on Mars? It has no solar panels. Just because nuclear energy is not being used in cellphones does not mean something safer and long lasting can be found. In fact there are many battery technologies that are being tested now, and they are slowed by simply not being used. If the iPhone didn't use Gorilla Glass, that Corning glass would not be used. Someone just needs to take it and use it, and it becomes the next technology.
  10. swervinsuburban macrumors regular

    Nov 5, 2012
    Instead of complaining on a forum about it why don't you go try to implement it? Not to be rude but you look kind of lazy complaining about something and not taking action about it.
  11. Megalobyte macrumors 6502a

    Dec 30, 2007
    Even at 4-5" away, with Apple's "low" ppi number, I cannot see pixels, no matter how hard I try. To suggest even at 800 ppi you can barely make them out, on a 5" screen is pretty much ridiculous. I can't even imagine what benefit a 5" screen would get from a 4k resolution, or even 1080p. On a phone display, I think there's a point where adding more resolution is just to say you did it, with no actual real world benefits.
  12. nuckinfutz macrumors 603


    Jul 3, 2002
    Middle Earth
    My eyes must SUCK because I really can't see pixels at 326 PPI on the iPhone. I so desperately WANT to see them but my eyesight is poor.
  13. alphaod macrumors Core


    Feb 9, 2008
    Not going to happen unless Apple feels like making their developers redo the interface for yet another screen resolution.
  14. JetBlack7 macrumors 68020


    May 14, 2011
    Another pointless rant. If you're not satisfied with Apple or think you have a point, contact them and explain your ideas.

Share This Page