How Apple Could Make the Move to 4.7" iPhone Displays

[redscull]

Also I don't understand how doubling it makes it simple, when the screen size is not doubling with it. If the scaling is the same then you get smaller icons. If you double the scaling to match the doubling of pixels, everything is bigger and there is no extra space. Unless I'm thinking about this wrong.

You're not thinking about it wrong. Doubling again does not help. If the physical screen is not twice as big, everything on it will be twice as small to touch; lots of screen real estate, but very hard to use. Or, you double the dimensions of your assets and everything is easy to use and very sharp, but you don't gain any real estate; like the retina iPad, it's beautifully crisp but still no more on screen room than an iPad 2.

If the point of a bigger screen is to have more screen real estate, the resolution needs to increase in a way that yields a similar ppi while on the larger screen. That way the controls maintain their physical size but we getroom for more of them.

If the point is just to help people who struggle to see small icons and text, the resolution should be unchanged or dimension-doubled for the larger screen.

 

[GreyOS]

It would be pointless only if Apple is trying to actively avoid a pixel density increase.

Well that's they very thing in question isn't it? You think doubling the pixels would be simplest and thus what Apple would try to do. I disagree. lol. Oh well. I give up for now! Ciao!

 

[jrswizzle]

The LG G3 is rumored to have a 2560 x 1440 display. LG is a manufacturer Apple, right?

http://gadgets.ndtv.com/mobiles/new...-qhd-1440x2560-pixel-screen-resolution-508510

Hmm you would be correct - except that it'll likely be AT LEAST 5" if not larger.

We're talking 4.7" display here. Actually, the fact the 5.5" iPhone has been "rumored" to be delayed may be because they want in on the LG displays. So for the iPhablet, you might be on to something.

But as of yet, I haven't seen any 500+ ppi display under 5" out there....

Perhaps Apple does 1920x1080 for the 4.7" and this LG QHD display for the 5.5"?

Still think its more "Apple Character" to go only as high as they need to in order to minimize negative trade-offs elsewhere. Apple is all about diminishing returns - they don't go further than they feel necessary in order to not compromise in places that can improve. I think the rumors are probably more accurate.

 

[iPadCary]

I, for one, would like to see a Note3-sized iPhone.
A real miniature, pocketable iPad.

 

[Rettun1]

They will just double the pixels, like they did on the iphone, like they did on the iPad, like they did on the Macbook etc etc.

But they've never doubled the pixels twice for any device

 

[D.T.]

Also I don't understand how doubling it makes it simple, when the screen size is not doubling with it. If the scaling is the same then you get smaller icons. If you double the scaling to match the doubling of pixels, everything is bigger and there is no extra space. Unless I'm thinking about this wrong.

You’re correct, and what the poster in the quoted comment (a reply to my original post) isn’t factoring in. You’re doubling the resolution, however, you’re _also_ increasing the physical display area, so the PPI isn’t doubling like 163 to 326, it’s going from 326 to ~555.

You have to start thinking about assets (and things like touch targets) in context of points, and how that could scale. If a resource is 44points, you can scale that into a retina resolution by saying 1pt = 2px, and in non-retina as 1pt=1px. The resulting physical touch target size will be the same.

See additional explanation and discussion from David below

I don't think doubling makes things any easier. The linear resolution would be 100% greater but the display would only be 17.5% physically larger.

The result would be that all the user interface components would be much larger than every previous iPhone. Is that a good idea?

At the moment Apple supports four display sizes:

3.5 inch / 4 inch / 7.9 inch / 9.7 inch

However they only support two ppis (with non-retina in brackets):

326 (163) ppi / 264 (132) ppi

Would they want to add a third ppi to the list? Or add a fifth display size?

 

[PlanetFree]

More and more people are using there phone as there primary and only device so having a bigger screen makes a difference when its your only device.

A larger screen size would be useful in some instances but i wouldnt want to read an ebook on one for that my iPad mini is the perfect size.

 

[snebes]

but Apple and all the fan boys said 3.5" is the perfect size

That's not what she said.

I don't get this resolution, but it isn't for me to decide. Can't wait to see that iOS8 can bring to the iPad. Hopefully better organization of icons and whatnot.

 

[doelcm82]

but Apple and all the fan boys said 3.5" is the perfect size

ALL the fanboys don't ever agree on anything.

But the haters all say the same thing. Every time. Without exception. They are really just one hater, cloned many times. No one can tell one hater from another. That's a scientific fact.

 

[redscull]

launchpad

I'm not exactly disagreeing with the things you said.. but you asking for launchpad is rather odd. The iOS home screen full of icons IS the OSX launchpad. Identically. Both are grids of icons that launch apps. Both can swipe between "pages" of these icon grids. Both can group icons into folders. Both have a type-to-search means of narrowing down the icon list for when simply browsing isn't finding the app you're looking for. So what feature do you think iOS is lacking when you're talking about launchpad??

 

[ghettochris]

I really hope 4.7" isn't the smallest iphone apple makes starting soon. I want my iphone nano!

 

[goaliefight]

Too Long

I would rather have a wider display. I don't care about one handed operation.

 

[yoz-y]

What is wrong with the current pixel density? Colors and visibility in sunlight are way more important, I hope they will improve those.

I would fancy a 1440x900 pixels screen, let the designers create new assets and code a more interesting UI, it is their job.

 

[peteo]

that letterbox looks terrible...

Yes it looks so bad my eye's are BLEEDING!!!, make it stop. I want a 6.9 inch phone with BLURRED graphics!, guess apples not gonna do that. I'll have to jump over to an android phablet, screw usability!!

 

[cmChimera]

http://gadgets.ndtv.com/mobiles/new...-qhd-1440x2560-pixel-screen-resolution-508510

Hmm you would be correct - except that it'll likely be AT LEAST 5" if not larger.

We're talking 4.7" display here. Actually, the fact the 5.5" iPhone has been "rumored" to be delayed may be because they want in on the LG displays. So for the iPhablet, you might be on to something.

But as of yet, I haven't seen any 500+ ppi display under 5" out there....

Perhaps Apple does 1920x1080 for the 4.7" and this LG QHD display for the 5.5"?

Seems possible to me. I'm not very convinced that the 5.5" iPhone will come into existence yet, but it's definitely possible that, if it does, it will have a higher resolution than the 4.7".

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

4 pages and not one gripe about fragmenting. Flip back just before the rumors piled up about Apple's switch to the different aspect ratio of the "5", and see a TON of bashes against Android phones for fragmenting resolutions to create "developer nightmares." Apple doing it? Not a gripe about it and the spin goes how developer-friendly Apple is for giving the developers all this time to adapt to these other (RUMORED) screen resolutions. What would be developer friendly is announcing the resolutions so that the developer would know what to target.

Similarly, I remember passionate arguments from those seemingly in the know who said iOS is set up so that ONLY pixel doubling works… that a resolution between an established size and actually doubling can't possibly work because iOS is not set up for variable screen resolutions. I think I had what seemed like 10 different discussions on this very topic with very passionate posters who all argued this. Now? No problem, let's guess at all kinds of resolutions in between- even different ones for a rumored 4.7" and a 5.5" and it's all fine (except for the "but I must be able to use it with one-hand crowd"- even though just about every one of us has 2 hands Personally, I'm in the "but it must be thinner" crowd because the current one is just so thick it's almost unbearable; I can hardly wait until all iDevices are thinner than a sheet of paper because thin is such a valuable and important tangible benefit in such devices. Also

On topic: pixel doubling to "beyond retina" seems stupid to me. Why waste the horsepower driving graphics that are apparently beyond our eyes ability to see the difference? If "retina" really is the MAX for human eyes, we don't need a super-retina or ultra-retina or whatever it might be called. Might as well spin infrared spectrum screen and all of the other spectrum that we can't possibly see as included in the next iPhone too. It seems like other than some kind of bragging rights (like Mhz or Ghz numbers), there's no actual benefit that any human will be able to see.

Based on the past passionate arguments about fragmentation and "iOS can't handle anything but doubling" vs. present rumors about resolutions ranging from all kinds of guesses in between and doubling, I don't know what to make of these rumors.

 

[the8thark]

Whatever dude nice rant but 4,7 is not a phablet especially if they make a clever design not even close.

Try again.

Phablet is too large for a phone but too small for a good sized tablet. It's a qualitative description. Everyone has their own subjective views on what is and is not a phablet.

Not sure you understood my previous comment (based on your reply to it) but I'll reply again just in case you did.

 

[GreyOS]

You're not thinking about it wrong.

Thank you. I agree with what you said too.

I have said this before but feel I may be a teeny bit clearer, for others:

I think people are confused because they look at the iPhone 3GS -> iPhone 4 change and see the pixels doubled. But you have to remember, the screen size didn't change in this case. This was merely an exercise in increasing the density of the display to make it crisper.

Now, what is the problem at hand now? They have a phone with a bigger screen. How will they handle this? Well, actually, the iPhone 4S -> iPhone 5 change is more analogous, as the screen size actually changed then too. And what did they do? They maintained density, and increased the resolution, proportionally to the physical screen size change. It got more vertical pixels. They filled in the extra vertical physical space with same sized pixels.

So, iPhone 5S -> iPhone 6. The screen size is changing again. Is density an issue? No, I don't think so. I'm not saying they will never increase their density again, but I don't think that is the main issue to tackle. We can assume they will keep the density the same to keep things simple. This means that 1 pixel in the software will still be the same physical size, no worries about how software scales and renders stuff. Touch targets etc. will remain the same. Very simple. So then they just need to fill the extra physical space on the screen with the same sized pixels.

That's the way I see it happening anyway.

Now, there ARE many ways they can do it, really, and the above isn't the only way, there is no guarantee at all. But I am combatting the notion that "simply" doubling the pixels is really that simple. It presents many other problems, in the way pixels translate the physical size, how the software will have to scale differently, etc. etc. There is no "simple" solution, and you think it's "simple" because of a false analogy with when iPhone 4 went retina.

 

[zaphon]

Anything below at least 1920x1080 would be a real disappointment. The screen resolution has been my one major annoyance with coming back to the iPhone 5s from an Android device. I know we're getting a bigger screen, but I want more pixels as well (I have the same problem with computer displays, if a 23" display is at 1920x1080 (which I hate, give me 1920x1200 please), I expect a 27" to have a higher resolution, but most are still 1920x1080 (because they're TV's)).

 

[DanielDD]

There's something that Apple should have fixed with iOS 7 that I think it is going to be mandatory now given the new screen resolution.

Apple should not put black stripes on the sides of the screen. Instead, it should be a blurred effect like the one found on the default reminders app. However, I expect some tweaking on it to make the background image clearer.

This way, the letterbox approach seems more viable because it makes the app behave like a pop up window.

By the way, this approach would be great when installing iPhone apps on the iPad.

 

[sbrhwkp3]

Just horrible as an Apple phablet. That's a mistake if it ever is made. So many Apple phablet rumours these days. We have 2 options:

1. The rumours are all wrong. No harm done.
2. Apple will make the mistake of making an Apple phablet.

If No.2 happens I will be upset. I want to buy an iPhone 6 maybe. But if Apple only releases the iPhablet 6 then I'll be forced to buy old tech or stick with my iPhone 1.

And making both an iPhone 6 and an iPhablet 6 is a no go as well. Apple already have enough SKUs. Too many is what ****ed Apple up in the 90s. No going and repeating that all over again.

Apple is on the cusp of me not buying the iPhablet 6 (or any iPhones anymore). Even though I do like the iPhone line, I don't want to buy a phablet.

Does the word phablet make anyone else want to punch whoever uses it in the face?

 

[whooleytoo]

Not sure I like the black border in the non-optimised version. Given iOS7's use of translucency, they could use a translucent/blurred version of the screen as the border/background - as lots of TV channels do when showing 4:3 content on widescreen. It makes the border a lot less jarring.

 

[Hattig]

No.

A 1334x750 is stupid and doesn't make any sense. It will make app development harder since there is really no relation to any of the other devices.

I agree. I believe they will either double the resolution in each direction, or up it by 50%.

So with 50%, 1136x640 would become 1704x960. The PPI would increase of course, which would keep the iPhone up with all the other phones with willy-waving resolutions and PPI.

And it would scale UI components where it had to - but the fact that the old resolution and the new resolution are retina will hide most of the artifacts that stretching would create.

Doubing is easier, and that would be 2272x1280, and as phones are coming out with 2560x1440 or thereabouts displays, it isn't technically infeasible.

 

[jimbo1mcm]

If this thread was on a final exam, I would fail. I have a headache.

 

[Dresling]

I still think they will double the iPhone 5s resolution, 326 ppi on a 4.7" is good but is not future proof.

The iPhone can more then handle the higher resolution, just look at the Retina iPad Mini.


And they better come up with something more productive and creative to take up the extra space on the iPad and the iPhone 6 with IOS 8. The iPad just got the hand me down features the iPhone got on IOS 7, The iPad needs features that take advantage of the huge landscape,
Split screen? Widgets? Live larger icons? SOMETHING!!!!!

How is 326ppi not future proof? Unless you're eyes can suddenly pick up more details on their own, everything above 300ppi will be just fine.