I'd be happy with a 326dpi display as long as they can double the battery life or better of the iPhone 5. That and 2GB of ram for future proofing later versions of iOS.
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
Haha, you are only proving my point, who uses a phone 4 inches from their face? Look at your iPhone's screen size, it is 4 inches, are you telling me that's the distance you use your phone from your face? If so you are the only one with poor eyesight. Go get a pair of glasses.
I have an iPhone 4 and I want a bigger one. I want more screen real estate because I rarely use the phone in iPhone.
I said I use it from 6-8" and yes I can see them at 8" and of course I use it further at times, just depends.
Yeah. Also, those talking about artefacts showing 720p video etc... The whole point is the density is so high anyway. I mean if you're watching a video on a phone and moan about artefacts that shouldn't really be detectable anyway... wow.. lol.
The obsession with pixel count abstracted from the physical size of the screen is crazy. You don't have to reach these magical numbers. Are people gonna call for 1080p on the iWatch?
Agreed. Macs don't have this problem. As for fragmentation, the bigger problem mentioned seems to be different OS versions and phone speeds.
but Apple and all the fan boys said 3.5" is the perfect size
For one handed use, it still is.
A bit off topic, but I can imagine how Apple will introduce these new size screens and explain away their obstinate refusal that you can use anything above 4".
They'll discuss how they closely analysed how people used their phones and how some operations were suited to being one handed and others are commonly two handed operations.
They then looked at the biggest issues facing single handed operations in the most popular cases. texting / emailing / browsing etc.
Then they explain:
TC: "it turns out - we already solved this! back in iOS 7!"
*people gasp with shock. Busty women in corsets faint elegantly onto chaise lounges. A single desperate individual stands up and wails "show us how, oh mighty Cook?"*
TC: "...It turns out we introduced the back swipe, that means you don't have to reach all the way up to the top left corner of your phone anymore. And with the introduction of the sleep/wake button on the side of the device, we really think we cracked this one"
*The audience roars with applause and confetti streams from the ceiling of the auditorium. Realising the error of their ways, scores of journalists and fanboys take part in a ritualistic smashing of their pathetic 4" screens under their New Balance heels and hail the arrival of their glorious new HD screens.*
They'll discuss how they closely analysed how people used their phones and how some operations were suited to being one handed and others are commonly two handed operations.
They then looked at the biggest issues facing single handed operations in the most popular cases. texting / emailing / browsing etc.
Then they explain:
TC: "it turns out - we already solved this! back in iOS 7!"
*people gasp with shock. Busty women in corsets faint elegantly onto chaise lounges. A single desperate individual stands up and wails "show us how, oh mighty Cook?"*
TC: "...It turns out we introduced the back swipe, that means you don't have to reach all the way up to the top left corner of your phone anymore. And with the introduction of the sleep/wake button on the side of the device, we really think we cracked this one"
*The audience roars with applause and confetti streams from the ceiling of the auditorium. Realising the error of their ways, scores of journalists and fanboys take part in a ritualistic smashing of their pathetic 4" screens under their New Balance heels and hail the arrival of their glorious new HD screens.*
Bigger displayed iPhone should be a little bit more comfortable on my eyes. I like using the iPad because I can hold it further from my face without all the text being really tiny.
but Apple and all the fan boys said 3.5" is the perfect size
At one time, everyone said that B&W TVs were fine, and color would never catch on. Time changes things.
3.5" was the perfect size way back when, but for most people now, it's not.
I can use a 5 inch device with only one hand. A smaller screen is just more comfortable to use.
And no my hands aren't huge.
Yeah, also not to mention iPhone 6 will go up in price by $ 100
No. The 5.5" will. If anyone expected Apple to release a 4.7" and 5.5" iPhone 6, and have them both be $649 then I feel really really sorry for your lack of intelligence. If there are 3 iPhone 6 sizes at 4", 4.7", and 5.5" then it will likely be $649, $699, $749.
No, they are gonna call for 1080P on the next iPhone since it's now 2014 and all manufacturers have been offering this standard resolution for over 2 years all the while we are paying the and price for less screen.
Yeah you can if you adjust the phone in your hand like letting it slide up it down in your hand. Good luck using a 5" one handed without doing what I just said.
The only time when this is necessary is when you have to touch a button that is either way up on the top right or on the top left corner depending which hand you use.
So the screen size and number of pixels would increase, but wouldn't appear to because the GUI would be the same? (Remembering that the GUI is made of pixels, not vector graphics.)
Not trying to be annoying here, just trying to get my head round what you mean.
3.5" was the perfect size due to bezels. If anyone says they'd prefer a small display size then they are lying. Everyone wants a smaller physical device size, not a display size. If the iPhone 1 had no bezel, just display, or it had what it actually had, which would you choose? If you say the latter then you should be sent in a rocket toward the sun.
This is why iOS7 is so plain and boring looking. I highly suspect that the removal of all decoration and skeumorphism was to better facilitate rescaling the UI for a variety of form factors with different aspect ratios. Developers can build logic into the UI framework that moves things around, resizes them, etc. depending on the orientation, resolution, etc., but it's harder to do that well when you have a texture-rich UI.
Unfortunately, I personally don't like this new direction. I believe that a UI should be optimized for the resolution, aspect ratio, physical size, and how it's meant to be used. A TV-centric UI, for example, may have large buttons, icons, and text even though the resolution is high, because you're going to be using it from a distance away. And you don't want too many controls on screen, either, because you want to be able to use it with a simple remote control. An large-screen iPad, OTOH, may have a similar resolution, but you can have more buttons, smaller text, etc. because you'll be looking at it from a closer distance and navigating it with your finger or a stylus. A phone will have its own set of demands, as will a UI used in an automobile. And a touchscreen-based auto UI will have different needs than an auto UI that is meant to be operated by a joystick.
But I think we're seeing Apple now adopt the mentality that you can create a single app, and with a bit of extra coding, that same app will automagically rescale and work wonderfully on all manner of devices. And I think that's wrong. What you'll get instead is an app that "works" on all of those devices, but doesn't work *well* on any one of them.
And, yeah, I miss the skeumorphism, too, as I believe that can add real value to the user experience.
Unfortunately, I personally don't like this new direction. I believe that a UI should be optimized for the resolution, aspect ratio, physical size, and how it's meant to be used. A TV-centric UI, for example, may have large buttons, icons, and text even though the resolution is high, because you're going to be using it from a distance away. And you don't want too many controls on screen, either, because you want to be able to use it with a simple remote control. An large-screen iPad, OTOH, may have a similar resolution, but you can have more buttons, smaller text, etc. because you'll be looking at it from a closer distance and navigating it with your finger or a stylus. A phone will have its own set of demands, as will a UI used in an automobile. And a touchscreen-based auto UI will have different needs than an auto UI that is meant to be operated by a joystick.
But I think we're seeing Apple now adopt the mentality that you can create a single app, and with a bit of extra coding, that same app will automagically rescale and work wonderfully on all manner of devices. And I think that's wrong. What you'll get instead is an app that "works" on all of those devices, but doesn't work *well* on any one of them.
And, yeah, I miss the skeumorphism, too, as I believe that can add real value to the user experience.
So the screen size and number of pixels would increase, but wouldn't appear to because the GUI would be the same? (Remembering that the GUI is made of pixels, not vector graphics.)
Not trying to be annoying here, just trying to get my head round what you mean.
Take the GUI of the iPhone 5S and make it bigger. At the same time you increase its sharpness.
I'm all for this method, retain the same 326ppi and expand screen resolution to fill the new size. But that 1334x750 is stupid. It's not divisible by 16!! At least 1344x752, or 1360x768 if size go to near 4,8". My opinion is that 4,7" is a wrong choice, they should go to 4,5" so it's 720p at 326ppi and 1080p at 5,5" with new assets (@3x).