They probably needed the same proportions so they cant just stretch the screen.this isnt answering your questions i dont think but im wondering why on the new iPod touch did they leave all that blank room at the top of the iPod? they could have made the screen bigger.
If I'm not mistaken they are made by different contractors in China which probably accounts for the VERY slight difference in dimensions and screen pixel count, etc. Otherwise I don't know why that would be.the screens look the same size (tech specs say 3.5" for each) but on the website the iPod touch looks like a smaller unit than the iPhone (and the tech specs confirm this). i'm not sure if that answers specifically what you're asking, though.
The number of pixels is listed as identical. This would mean your reply is not correct.Same screen size, just more pixels in the exact same measured area. That means the picture will be a little sharper. 3 pixels sharper since the iPhone is 160 pixels per inch, while the iPod touch is 163 pixels.
except that 480x320 is a fixed number of pixels no matter how you look at it. They cannot both have the same number of pixels in the same size of screen and yet differing ppi counts.yes, they are both 480 x 320, but manufacturers have been known at times when it comes to displays to use dpi interchangeable with pixels per inch. But the physical size of the screen is still 3.5, it's very clear and simple in regards to it's specs. So if you read it you'll see 160 dpi and 163 pixels per inch, that is a difference, but there is no difference in the diagonal measurement of the screen itself.
Diagonal viewing area which is 3.5 on each, that's a match.
480 x 320 pixel resolution that's 480 lines horizontal by 320 lines horizontal, that's a match.
160 dpi (interchangeable for some screen manufacturers with ppi) compared to 163 ppi, not a match, but that does not affect the size of the screen. That means in one square inch area on the iPhone there are 160 pixels, in the iPod touch there are 163 pixels in the same one square inch area. That translates into a sharper image on the iPod touch.
Yeah, CLuv isn't making sense to me here, either, and I'm not stupid (grad student in physical sciences).except that 480x320 is a fixed number of pixels no matter how you look at it. They cannot both have the same number of pixels in the same size of screen and yet differing ppi counts.
Unless you've found some new way to redefine integral mathematics.
Thanks for that. I get it now.here's information on ppi to help clarify
A 3.5" screen cannot change size of the viewing area, even if one manufacturer makes a finer, more precise screen that has a greater number of pixels in the same defined area. This area is know as ppi or dpi. Think of computer monitors that show 23 dpi or 20 dpi, but they are both 21" monitors. One screen can fit more pixels in the same area, therefore the 23 dpi will have a sharper picture then a 20 dpi monitor. The physical viewing on both is 21" even though one has more dpi/ppi.
It's not, it's just the number of lines that run from one side of the screen to the other side of the screen in a horizontal and vertical measurement. There are pixels that make up the line, and if you measured a one inch area on your screen, in that area there would be 160 or 163 pixels, depending on how small each pixel is that makes up that area.
I am trying to understand this.Think of computer monitors that show 23 dpi or 20 dpi, but they are both 21" monitors. One screen can fit more pixels in the same area, therefore the 23 dpi will have a sharper picture then a 20 dpi monitor. The physical viewing on both is 21" even though one has more dpi/ppi.
So there will be more pixels on the iPod then the iPhone.Correct, the manufacturer of the iPod touch screen has made a better screen that can fit more pixels in the same sized viewing area. That means each pixel is smaller then their last version (assuming it's the same manufacturer of the iPhone's screen) and since each pixel is smaller/finer, that means it will translate into a sharper image on the same sized screen.