So a follow up question I have then is which direction has the trend been going say in the last 5 years with things predicted by Kuo vs. those that have actually been true with the iPhone? Proof please.
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.
iPhone 14 Pro and Pro Max Hole-Punch Displays to Be Supplied By LG and Samsung
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
When they get rid of the notch they’ll be walking away from one of their biggest design flubs ever.
Face ID during a global pandemic of a respiratory disease is another huge error but Apple seems content to make us keep muddling through with the wrong biometrics.
Face ID during a global pandemic of a respiratory disease is another huge error but Apple seems content to make us keep muddling through with the wrong biometrics.
How could you possibly ask for ‘proof’ for an insider that’s made self-claimed predictions that ultimately have been proven semi-accurate back from the iPhone X and some of them have been inherently not true. There’s no trajectory of the iPhone in terms of him being entirely accurate, but can you name any other analyst that his accuracy of track record? I certainly can’t. And I highly doubt you could either.
Furthermore, what more are you expecting that the iPhone should be different in the sense of what it should have offered versus what it has been offering based off any other analyst? Again, I don’t know anyone more accurate than Ming-Kuo.
It doesn’t work like that. Face ID existed long before the pandemic, and Apple did mitigate ways around to unlock your phone with using a mask. It seems you mistakenly forgot to even mention that in your post.
Furthermore, you don’t have to use Face ID, you can still unlock your phone with a passcode if that was something that was that much of an issue for the user. That’s also something you failed to mention.
You're right, I don't know and this is why I asked for proof. You sounded like such an advocate of this person and their predictions I thought you would be able to show this proof without much effort, as you also said this person's predictions have been proven over the years, many times. So, show me.
Macrumors ‘advocates’ Ming Kuo quite heavily, for obvious reasons, which you seem oblivious to. Since you’re very vague in your responses and not descriptive of what specifically what you’re looking for which iPhone model, parity features or any specific hardware implementation, I’ve taken the courtesy to post a link for you that date stamps chronologically Ming-Kuo’s trajectory of predictions of iPhone/other Apple hardware, (scroll to the bottom of the link and it gives you years of accountability of predictions that he’s made, some of which have been accurate and others which were delayed.)
Make sure you take the time to actually read the links and click on the actual predictions made, and what was followed through in terms of manufacturing. For that, that research is for you to do.
Ming-Chi Kuo | Reports, Rumors, Accuracy, History
Ming-Chi Kuo is a well respected Apple analyst who has provided the industry with accurate predictions for over a decade. Find out more about the latest reports here.
I may be alone in thinking this, but I don’t really understand what the benefits are of a hole punch design (which, by the way, would need to accommodate four components) versus the ‘notch’, or indeed a smaller version of one.
Something that works very well for the current design is that the camera and Face ID modules are, essentially, made to become part of the device’s frame. By having a continuous unobstructed black border around the screen, the components are not glaringly obvious or in the way of the content you're viewing. It's made clear that the area is an extension of the border.
But the moment you break that border, you introduce a number issues.
For instance, is the tiny space between the 'holes' and the border of any significant value to the user? Or is it purely an aesthetic choice to say that you're maximising space, even though it doesn't bring any benefits?
What happens if you press/hold in that area whilst in landscape mode?
Will it confuse people more having black circles on their content rather than an area that's clearly inactive? Would it confuse some users into thinking they're items on the status bar?
These are simple questions, but the kind that Apple will have thought hard about. Just because other companies are taking the hole punch approach doesn't make it the right choice - it's simply a feature that I would say struggles to convey any clear benefits.
If Apple found a way to engineer the display so that only camera module needed a hole punch, then this could be a different matter altogether. I'm just not sure how the other 3 modules would be incorporated behind the display.
Something that works very well for the current design is that the camera and Face ID modules are, essentially, made to become part of the device’s frame. By having a continuous unobstructed black border around the screen, the components are not glaringly obvious or in the way of the content you're viewing. It's made clear that the area is an extension of the border.
But the moment you break that border, you introduce a number issues.
For instance, is the tiny space between the 'holes' and the border of any significant value to the user? Or is it purely an aesthetic choice to say that you're maximising space, even though it doesn't bring any benefits?
What happens if you press/hold in that area whilst in landscape mode?
Will it confuse people more having black circles on their content rather than an area that's clearly inactive? Would it confuse some users into thinking they're items on the status bar?
These are simple questions, but the kind that Apple will have thought hard about. Just because other companies are taking the hole punch approach doesn't make it the right choice - it's simply a feature that I would say struggles to convey any clear benefits.
If Apple found a way to engineer the display so that only camera module needed a hole punch, then this could be a different matter altogether. I'm just not sure how the other 3 modules would be incorporated behind the display.
I wasn't expecting anything, which I think is the answer to your question. However, this link you provided is so good I put it in my favorites. Now I can move forward and have an informed opinion about this guy and his fortune telling of the intricacies in Apple products and what may come in the future.Macrumors ‘advocates’ Ming Kuo quite heavily, for obvious reasons, which you seem oblivious to. Since you’re very vague in your responses and not descriptive of what specifically what you’re looking for which iPhone model, parity features or any specific hardware implementation, I’ve taken the courtesy to post a link for you that date stamps chronologically Ming-Kuo’s trajectory of predictions of iPhone/other Apple hardware, (scroll to the bottom of the link and it gives you years of accountability of predictions that he’s made, some of which have been accurate and others which were delayed.)
Make sure you take the time to actually read the links and click on the actual predictions made, and what was followed through in terms of manufacturing. For that, that research is for you to do.
Ming-Chi Kuo | Reports, Rumors, Accuracy, History
Ming-Chi Kuo is a well respected Apple analyst who has provided the industry with accurate predictions for over a decade. Find out more about the latest reports here.appleinsider.com
Looking forward to the new design. Quite possible that hole punch cut out can turn out to be pill shaped like Galaxy S10+ to accommodate FaceID sensors.
Then all the people saying they don't mind the notch or they like it will start saying no notch is better. Everybody knows the notch is an ugly compromise. Even Apple wants to get rid of it.
The fact that LG would (also) be producing for next year's Max Pro was reported earlier, either on this site, OR a different one, I don't remember, but it did contribute to me pulling the trigger on upgrading from an 11 Pro Max to a 13 Pro Max over the Thanksgiving weekend ... I wanted a Samsung display !
If I wanted till next year, there's NO guarantee of that !
If I wanted till next year, there's NO guarantee of that !
Surely with all of Apple's knowhow one option could be slightly increasing the bezel around the edge by a couple of mm's to incorporate a tiny camera/face id/speakers on the top edge rather than a notch or pinhole? I'd rather a slightly thicker bezel than the pinhole to be honest. They managed to reduce the size of the notch between the 12 and 13, I'm sure with more work and research they could incorporate it into the bezel.
But what’s the point in the tiny piece of screen above the speaker? Would be better with a a tiny notch.
Totally agree that the space above the hole punch isn’t usable for anything other than background color. I know I’m not the demographic of people who only own a smartphone for their computing and/or video uses, but the current notch is a non-issue in everyday use. Sure, if Apple could shrink it, that would be nice, but there is no limitation in usage for the current design and no real or measurable benefit for the mystical all-screen, no bezel, no cutout, no hole punch screen that this vocal group of techies wants / dreams of. I’m typing this on my M1 iPad Pro and I am totally fine with the size of the bezel, mainly because my fingers have to go somewhere when holding it, which of course is true also with the iPhone.
I'm notch gonna change unless the stainless steel is gone and we have titanium. What would be nice, is to have FaceId work horizontally too.
Last edited: