So many possibilties Apple can do for 4.7 and 5.5" displays. Let's just hope they actually do good with them, not that 5th row of icons stuff.
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.
How Apple Could Make the Move to 4.7" iPhone Displays
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What would you have them do? Put a giant clock on top? Or put a giant google search on top? Hide all the apps in the app draw, thus requiring an extra touch to get to your apps?
There is a reason why Windows look pretty much the same for twenty plus years. The grid icon arrangement is likely the most optimize way to get things done on smartphone.
No. And "its subjective term u dont understand" I never said that. Feel free to read what I said again. I just reinforced that I said, there was zero backpedaling there.
Fixed column and row is probably the laziest, least creative way to arrange things other than a text list. I expect that by now there should have been some advances beyond GUI that they used in the first days of computing. Apple could do worse than looking at what Microsoft was doing with wp8. A larger iPhone with the ability to expand app icons into live tiles and widgets on demand...
Why would Apple be making a mistake?
Repeat of the 1990's Apple is why. I (and many others) don't want to see that happen.
All of a sudden they made a mistake because you don't want it?
Me not wanting a phablet has nothing to do with it. I have zero want to buy an MBA but I think they are a brilliant device and deserve to be in the Apple line up. Just one example of many.
I am just stating the phablet like the net book of the past is a jack of all traces and master of none. And Apple does not make products that are (in their eyes) not the best. If Apple does indeed make a phablet, it will be a sad day, as then their idea of what a good product is will be partially flushed down the toilet.
You are confusing my personal opinions with the facts. I did say both in my previous post. But I'm sure with a little reading you could easily separate the two.
----------
Maybe because the truth hurts?
If they do this they have really lost the plot and cannot call their phones 'retina' display. My HTC One M7 does 1080p on a 4.7 inch device, and while those pixels are mostly invisible, I've opened up websites on both it and the iPhone 4s, and the HTC One has better clarity by far.
One of the main reasons I got the iPhone 4 over the android devices was because of the clarity of using the internet. Steve Jobs understood this when he announced the iPhone as 'A widescreen iPod, a phone, and a internet communications device'. This would be putting a huge blow to number 3.
----------
I wouldn't go that route. 'phablets' are masters of many things. How many netbooks were you able to take in your pocket? Netbooks were also using those crappy atom processors and were very slow, while phablets are fast, play ps2/early ps3 level games (And moving up with tegra k1 to near ps4 levels), and with 1080p displays, are all the pc most people need in their pocket!
Think of a phablet as basically the biggest most powerful computer that a person can fit in their pocket and go places without resorting to a tablet or laptop instead of a lesser device, and you'll understand why they are popular.
One of the main reasons I got the iPhone 4 over the android devices was because of the clarity of using the internet. Steve Jobs understood this when he announced the iPhone as 'A widescreen iPod, a phone, and a internet communications device'. This would be putting a huge blow to number 3.
----------
I wouldn't go that route. 'phablets' are masters of many things. How many netbooks were you able to take in your pocket? Netbooks were also using those crappy atom processors and were very slow, while phablets are fast, play ps2/early ps3 level games (And moving up with tegra k1 to near ps4 levels), and with 1080p displays, are all the pc most people need in their pocket!
Think of a phablet as basically the biggest most powerful computer that a person can fit in their pocket and go places without resorting to a tablet or laptop instead of a lesser device, and you'll understand why they are popular.
I switched to the iPhone 4 from Android because the display really blew everything else out of the water. Every other phone at the time (even the flagships) looked grainy in comparison. The gap isn't nearly as big but it is certainly middle of the pack now. Even the SGS4 which I used as a 2nd phone for a couple months showed some strengths. Something I never thought I'd say about AMOLED. I would be ecstatic if the next iPhone had a display like the HTC One.
but Apple and all the fan boys said 3.5" is the perfect size
3.5" is still fine for me.
Traditional LCD displays have 3 subpixels (RGB) per pixel, whereas the displays Samsung uses (pentile) only have 2 subpixels (RG or BG) per pixel, hence the "cheat". Only the green subpixel has the pixel desity suggested by the resolution. Blue and red are lower, because they are only in every other pixel. This is all old news though. At the density Samsung is using, it doesn't matter anymore. It was really only an issue with the first generation of pentile displays.
I really need more than 24 icons per page lol. Here's to 28!! This would leave me feeling a little deflated in all honesty.
But a bigger phone can easily create double digit growth on the high end. It's Android's biggest weapon, and people love big screens.
If Apple releases one, it's a great move. They will attack where it hurts.
Of course they sell 100" million 4" phones, so they will keep parity, like they do with both iPads and Macs.
Saying what you are saying is being stubborn and having 0 knowledge about the matter.
Besides, they can streamline their products a lot. 3.5" screens will go away, non-retina displays will go away.
They will end with less products.
About the delusional stuff that you were saying about the 90s, Apple could start losing 2 billion dollars today, each quarter, and they would survive almost 100 quarters, more than 40 years.
They made 13 billion last quarter. Google made less than 4?
Don't worry. You will die first.
One thing we know about Apple is that it is very careful to avoid fragmentation of their development platforms. Assuming recent rumours are correct and we can expect two new iPhone models, each with different screen sizes, it would be very surprising if this meant two new resolutions and/or pixel densities for developers to deal with.
A more likely scenario is that either (a) the 4.7 model will retain the existing resolution at a lower pixel density (260ppi, similar to the iPad Retina display) with a higher resolution (1080p?) for the 5.5 model, or (b) both models will implement the same resolution at differing pixel densities. Either option would mean that only one new resolution is introduced (though the rumoured delay of the 5.5 model, quite possibly due to manufacturing issues with its higher density display, favours the first scenario).
Interestingly, a 5.5 screen size is perfect for displaying full 1080p at 400ppi. The same resolution on a 4.7 screen would give 469ppi, which seems unnecessarily high and would be difficult and expensive to manufacture. The same 400ppi pixel density at 4.7 would yield a resolution of roughly 1364x768 pixelsslightly higher than Kuo is suggesting. Base on this, my guess would be that either Apple is moving to 400ppi displays across both of its new iPhone models, or that the 4.7 version will simply be a stretched iPhone 5 with larger pixelsactually not such a bad option for many users.
A more likely scenario is that either (a) the 4.7 model will retain the existing resolution at a lower pixel density (260ppi, similar to the iPad Retina display) with a higher resolution (1080p?) for the 5.5 model, or (b) both models will implement the same resolution at differing pixel densities. Either option would mean that only one new resolution is introduced (though the rumoured delay of the 5.5 model, quite possibly due to manufacturing issues with its higher density display, favours the first scenario).
Interestingly, a 5.5 screen size is perfect for displaying full 1080p at 400ppi. The same resolution on a 4.7 screen would give 469ppi, which seems unnecessarily high and would be difficult and expensive to manufacture. The same 400ppi pixel density at 4.7 would yield a resolution of roughly 1364x768 pixelsslightly higher than Kuo is suggesting. Base on this, my guess would be that either Apple is moving to 400ppi displays across both of its new iPhone models, or that the 4.7 version will simply be a stretched iPhone 5 with larger pixelsactually not such a bad option for many users.
I hope they don't add ANOTHER resolution to support. That's one major advantage Apple has over Android.
I'd like them to go to 1704x960 on a ~5 inch display. Easy transition, no additional support required from developers other than @3x assets.
I'd like them to go to 1704x960 on a ~5 inch display. Easy transition, no additional support required from developers other than @3x assets.
I'm going to be amazed if apple does the 1344x750 resolution. That is just the definition of thinking backwards. 326ppi is well enough for most people in practicality but the high end androids literally have 100ppi MORE. It's all about numbers these days and although you can't see pixels on current iPhones, higher resolution is always better. Not only is it better for viewing purpose but also for marketing. When you go buy a phone today you want to know what all the fuzz is about in the android phones. The sales man is definitely going to tell you that the phone has more than double the resolution which makes the screen both bigger and better.
Seriously? Are you using a device with Retina or a regular screen like the 1st gen iPad Mini or iPad 2? Maybe it's just psychological on your part that you're seeing the pixels. I increased the font size to the max on my iPhone 5 in iBooks and couldn't see any pixels. I decreased it back to the size I usually read my books at and still no pixels. Looking at the photos I've taken, I will say that I take bad shots, but still I can't see the pixels at normal viewing range.
Actually visual acuity ranges greatly from person to person. It's possible to see pixels at that resolution.
I see, got you now, thanks for the explanation. No the Nexus 5 uses an IPS Plus screen, Oppo's website state the Find 7 uses an IPS screen also, no mention of pentile screens.
If I remember, reviewers don't like some of Samsungs pentile screens?
Last edited:
So you think you need a physical button for TouchID? Good thing you and the four people who agreed with you aren't designing for Apple.
You need somewhere to put that touch sensor, and it's not going to be on the screen.
I guess the future won't arrive after all.
SJ was gunning to have that button removed ages ago btw. He hated it.
You don't need a depressible button for TouchID plain and simple.
Manufacturers like to keep buttons on devices even though you don't need them. I'm sure you've heard of planned obsolescence.
The first pentile screens were noticeably worse than RGB-stripe displays of comparable PPI. Current screens have a higher PPI and a better "diamond" subpixel arrangment which mitigate the pentile drawbacks found in the first versions.
