iPhone 5S Display Rumored to Carry Twice as Many Pixels as iPhone 5

[Jsameds]

My only question is - why?

Are people really going to see that kind of difference? On a 4" phone?

Yes, although you can't really see individual pixels, you can see the result of pixellation on some things.

An example is the jagged edges in games, here's an example.
http://applenapps.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/impossible_road2.jpg

Oh and I can't believe people are complaining about things getting better!!

 

[flux73]

No one believes this rumor.

 

[windywalks]

I still have apps on my phone that are not optimized for iPhone 5 and show up letterboxed. Can't see individual pixels either. This would only make marketing sense, other than that an iPhone with iPad resolution at 4" - not going to happen.

 

[charlituna]

NEWSFLASH

"Retina" is just a made up marketing word for Apple

That made up marketing word has real math behind it' which Apple has released to the public. And based on that math, there seems little point in this rumor

 

[mbh]

Steve Jobs said 300dpi was in his words "the magic number"

Apple has always defined Retina in terms of the distance you hold the display from your eyes. Jobs did not say that Retina = 300dpi.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hq8j5vsqCCo&t=1m32s

"It turns out that there's a magic number right around 300 pixels per inch that when you hold something around 10 or 12 inches away from your eyes is the limit of the human retina to differentiate the pixels."

 

[Intarweb]

Won't happen.

 

[Benjamins]

I guess my question is, is that even possible?

 

[ChazUK]

What kind of mobile GPU could push that many pixels?

Seems massively unnecessary. The screen on my iPod touch 5th gen is fine. Can't ever imagine wantingore pixels on the thing.

 

[paradox00]

How does that change the fact that it has a 1920x1080 resolution?

When did I say it changed that fact? It has a 1080p screen with two subpixels per pixel compared to the traditional three. It's a good screen, but in terms of visual acuity it's not worlds above the iPhone's, which was the point I was discussing.

 

[Thunderhawks]

Actual name is iPhone 5S Maxi.

We haven't heard iPhone 5S Plus for a while or iPhone 5S Pro or the iPhone
Galore (as in pixels galore)

This analyst thinks that the next iPhone will have a wrap around screen so one can see everything regardless of how the phone is held.

And, of course with Tim Cook mentioning "triple down" the resolution will be 3 times as much as it is now.

 

[RightMACatU]

More pixels??? seriously, the competition is now delivering this in a 5" format.
I've been in the 4.8" & 5" displays over the last year and 4" devices are dead to me.

 

[FirstNTenderbit]

A thinner desktop is thinner. It requires less space in your bag. It makes an actual difference.

This made me laugh so hard. I hope there was sarcasm involved in creating this comment. If not...

 

[thisisdallas]

I don't actually understand how a phone screen over 4" is beneficial in any way. In my experience with larger phones and tablets, it just blows up apps and buttons to be overly large and spacious. The size doesn't add any increased usability aside from maybe allowing for more text to be viewed on the screen at one time.

Personally, my large hands have absolutely no trouble tapping the necessary buttons on my 4" iPhone (aside from the notification center x's). I don't mind scrolling on my phone to see content, either. The tradeoff of having a phone so large that it becomes awkward to use and hold is not worth it.

Maybe I am being naïve, but there is absolutely no benefit to a larger screen aside from seeing more text and unnecessarily larger elements. I'm convinced that this demand for a larger screen is simply because people are starting to believe that it is a must. Somewhere in the recent years, the idea has been created that if the screen is small, it's inferior, which makes no sense.

I give the screen trend 3 or 4 years until people begin realizing that monstrous sized phones are unnecessary and inconvenient.

Apple played it right. 4" is just fine. As for the quality, I have absolutely no complaints. I have yet to see a better display (although I haven't really been looking at competitor displays in person)

 

[iKnowMr.Jobs]

We'll probably know when the first beta of iOS 7 is released. Chances are that they'll be some high res icons that someone will dig up underneath the code that'll indicate what resolution the next iPhone will have if there even is a bump in that spec. That how we found out what the resolution of the retina iPad was.

 

[samcraig]

Yes, although you can't really see individual pixels, you can see the result of pixellation on some things.

An example is the jagged edges in games, here's an example.
http://applenapps.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/impossible_road2.jpg

Oh and I can't believe people are complaining about things getting better!!

No. You get to a point where it's not going to make a difference on a 4" screen.

 

[Simengie]

Ugh

Reading comments just proves that people do not understand that Apple moves with slow and deliberate precision towards any change. That is why this rumor is just that. Such a change is drastic and has no pre-support in iOS6 to indicate that iOS7 would support such a beast.

Let us take a second to consider how (yes this matters) Apple will move to a higher resolution at some point. You see Apple will have a plan laid out to get there so that it is 1 supported at release and 2 provides a path for developers to get there from where we are today.

First, Apple needs to remove non-retina device support from iOS. Based on the app submission requirement change May 1st this year that all apps must support retina display modes for both the 3.5 and 4 inch screens on the phones you can figure that iOS 7 will most likely not support the iPhone 3GS and earlier devices. If developers no longer need two sets of art assets for iOS 7 apps then the app will get smaller in size.

Second, iOS 7 is not going to be the version to give us a new resolution on the devices. That will most likely come in iOS 8 next year. You can see this in the iOS history as 4 enabled retina and 6 enabled 4 inch iPhone 5. So based on Apple's track record I suspect next year iOS 8 will allow the iPhone 6 to have a new resolution. So iOS 7 will be a watershed version in which Apple removes support anything that is non-retina.

Third, the watershed of non-retina devices could extend into iPads as well and actually makes some sense to go there. In that without such changes universal apps would get really hard to maintain. Remember Apple has gone out of its way to make sure the development path from resolution 1 to resolution 2 has been easy on developers. I would expect this trend to continue.

My speculation and yes this is completely my opinion. We will see Apple with iOS8 and iPhone 6 in 2014 go to 1920x1080 resolution screens at a size they feel lives up to in hand experience. I expect 4 inch but maybe they will surprise us with something a bit bigger. Now why 1920x1080 and how does this help developers and what about all the apps that will be at 1136x640?

1920x1080 - if you are going to make a radical shift in resolution then move to an industry standard. This is where I have second thoughts. Apple could moved to 2560x1440 (1440P) as the screen resolution and there is a lot of good reasons to do this. Either way expect the next resolution to be based on a video format standard.

4 Inch - Face the facts that while there is a large number of people that like larger phones, there is a large number of people that like smaller devices. It is called preference and 4 inch is not that bad. Screen size effects battery life and Apple is very much about battery life in its products. If you think larger screen and lower battery life will be acceptable then go watch some older keynotes where they talk this very subject and you will hear them say that battery life always trumps. I don't see that part of the equation changing. So 4 inch is what I expect but when you read the next point you can see why something like 4.3 would be more optimal and an outside possibility.

Existing Apps on 1080p or even 1440p - first inside 1080 you can run all 1136x640 apps. In fact if you used a 4.3 inch screen the boarder app would be nearly the same size. This would preserve usability (another Apple corner stone guideline) of the existing apps. Since 1136x640 is a scaled version of the 1080p screen ratio developers would have the ability to easily upgrade their apps to the format. Also would allow native 1080P apps to be down scaled to fit on the 1136x640 screens that would still be floating around.Also since the scale is even in width and height Apple could use some form of asset tagging allowing an app to support both the 1080p and 1136x640 screen with the same code base easily. The same set of arguments hold up for 1440p display as well. The up side to 1440p would be that the iPad line could move to a resolution matching format. Really one screen resolution to rule all devices would make the developer front very exciting. Design once and run on all Apple devices. Yeah there is a lot of "it just works" magic in that thought.

Well that is my speculation. But I have been developing apps since iOS 3.1 and all of Apple's forward progression has been stepped and deliberate. You can even see Apple setting up for retina in iOS 3.x series with back end support for screen scaling being added. It was not used in iOS 3.x but they were moving forward with it. That is why the latest version of submission requirements to the app store on device and resolution support are very telling. After WWDC we will know a lot more but my take is that iOS7 will be iPhone4S min requirement. And that means that iOS7 targeted apps can drop art assets for non-retina resolutions and start getting their sizes down and code cleaned up for next year when iOS8 gives us the new resolution options used on the 2014 iPhone.

And one last point, Apple does not focus on iPhone X or iPad Y only when doing updates to the eco-system. It is an eco-system and each device has a place in that system and the system can not come crashing down because Apple got stupid and focused on one device only. So while the next iPhone is the big target for us outside Apple you can be sure the Apple team is looking at all the pieces and making sure no part of one device trashes everything else.

Ok a second last point, the rumor resolution change would be a mess on the iPad to simulate with the current method of running phone apps on the device. So it really does not pass that sniff test either.

 

[mw360]

My only question is - why?

Are people really going to see that kind of difference? On a 4" phone?

Really?!, because eagles demanded higher resolution iPhone screens?

Microscope Display (tm)?

A feature that does not improve any experience or functionality.

Double the pixels in such a small display doesn't make sense. I don't see this happening.

No way. Apple won't spend money on something nobody other than a few hundred 20/08 vision people will discern.

The iPhone 5 is already retina at a typical viewing distance. Going double retina actually gives zero noticeable improvement

Makes no sense after Apple themselves touted the retina display with so many pixels that the human eye can not discern them.

I was always under the impression that resolutions with higher PPI above "Retina" would be unnoticeable. Is this not correct?

If Apple said that the retina display looked good enough 3 years ago to where you "couldn't see the pixels at a normal distance", you have to ask yourself what would justify adding more.

This will put unneeded stress on the GPU and battery life... for what?

Great lateral thinking guys. To think it was only a few weeks ago when rumours were rife about a BIGGER SCREEN. Was that not a clue?

 

[Fishticks]

My only question is - why?

Maybe to help make a decent size screen.

 

[JayCee842]

This doesn't make sense. Maybe to use this as a marketing gimmick?

Who knows, but then again, nothing has made sense since Tim Cook took over.

 

[pubwvj]

Useless Update

File this in the Useless Upgrades category. Same place that the new iOS flat interface goes.

Apple should focus on providing better robustness, more compatibility and backward compatibility to all pervious software all the way back to the Apple I. There is a great deal of wonderful software for games, productivity and education that was created in the 1990's under MacOS7 through MacOS9 (Classic to those too young) which has never been replicated in the modern MacOSX and iOS. The new hardware on both the iPhone, iPad and MacBook all have the power to do the emulation - better yet, do one time cross compiles.

 

[carlgo]

Pixelphobe people are odd. They always come in with impassioned arguments about more pixels can't bee seen, the strain on the OS is too much, people watch from long distances..

And they are always wrong. 1080 is better to watch than 720, 24mp cameras are better than 6mp ones, retina iPad Minis will blow away the current one. Same with the phone. More is better.

 

[flux73]

I think Apple should introduce a 5"+ screen size, but not by enlarging the iPhone. They should shrink the iPad Mini - introduce the iPad Nano, measuring 5.5".

My thinking is this: if you really need a larger screen size, you probably don't care too much about pocket-ability, and you do a lot of web-surfing (and not a lot of talking). Thus, a tiny tablet with LTE would probably suit you better.

 

[gnasher729]

How does that change the fact that it has a 1920x1080 resolution?

The pixels consist of 2 sub pixels, while the pixels in any computer display that you can buy, and in most other devices, consist of 3 sub pixels. So the resolution doesn't tell you the full picture.

And I would actually argue that a Pentile display has only half the resolution that they want to make you believe (960 x 1080): The "pixels" that Samsung counts are _not_ individually capable of displaying every colour. Half the pixels are made of a red and a green component and can't display blue, while the other half of the pixels are made of a blue and a green component and can't display red. (Honesty demands to say that this would be better quality than a 960 x 1080 RGB display, because each pixel would be made up of four sub pixels instead of 3).

 

[finalcut]

My only question is - why?

Are people really going to see that kind of difference? On a 4" phone?

why? because they can. This is simply the same reason why camera company now do 30+ MP unit!

I am already missing the days of my Nikon D70 at 6MP!

high numbers increase sell, that's it

 

[Moonjumper]

actually there was no "for a phone" in steve jobs quote originally

OK then, to be pedantic, at the introduction of the retina iPhone, when he was talking about the phone he said:

“It turns out there’s a magic number right around 300 pixels per inch, that when you hold something around to 10 to 12 inches away from your eyes, is the limit of the human retina to differentiate the pixels.”

He specifically talked about pixels per inch, and viewing distance. At the first ever mention of "retina" it was 300ppi at 10-12 inches. It was never just 300ppi for any device.