Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Thicker on either the iPad or iPhone would NOT be bad. But, only if the thickness gave to add battery. Longer battery life out weights thin in my book any day. Don't you agree?
 
I for one would love it if a new iPhone is released by summer 2012. My 3GS is crapping out and I don't like the 4/4S at all.

The Galaxy Nexus seems awesome, but if the next iPhone looks anything like the well-known mock-up, I'd be willing to wait for that.
 
This basically means that Apple gives up on miniaturization - a battle that has been going on since - at least - the 19-eightties

Or, rather, they are realizing the trade-off between device size on the one hand, and "things to put into the device" on the other. The iPhone was huge at its launch. Was that because Apple went against "miniaturization" or that they figured it needed to be that size to "do the trick"?

If they make a thicker ipad it'll be for sake of a bigger battery. Simple as that.
 
Or, rather, they are realizing the trade-off between device size on the one hand, and "things to put into the device" on the other. The iPhone was huge at its launch. Was that because Apple went against "miniaturization" or that they figured it needed to be that size to "do the trick"?

If they make a thicker ipad it'll be for sake of a bigger battery. Simple as that.

Actually, if you read the MR article: "The source indicates that the iPad 3 is planned to launch in March and that it will be approximately 0.7 mm thicker than the iPad 2 due to the need to incorporate a dual light bar system for the higher-resolution display."

Good try at pretending to know everything though. :rolleyes:
 
If Apple builds a "retina display" iPad - meaning one with the same pixel density as the iPhone4 (326PPI)... ... ...
That is an incorrect assessment. The so-called "retina display" isn't defined by iPhone 4's PPI. It also isn't defined as a display of 300+ PPI. It is defined by normal viewing distance vs. PPI and it differs between device types (i.e. the PPI that is indistinguishable to the human eye when the device is viewed at "normal" distance). Viewing distance differs greatly between a TV set, a laptop, a tablet and a smartphone. Most TVs have pixel densities lower than 80PPI, but that doesn't matter because the viewing distance more than makes up for that. Most laptops look stunning with only 120-140 PPI (2011 Macbook Airs that are widely praised for their hi-res screens are around 128PPI). The "normal" viewing distance for a tablet (e.g. iPad) would be nearly twice that of a smartphone, thus the corresponding "retina" PPI would be lower, around 250PPI. A 2048x1536 9.7" (264PPI) display would be more than adequate to qualify as a "retina" display.
 
That is an incorrect assessment. The so-called "retina display" isn't defined by iPhone 4's PPI. It also isn't defined as a display of 300+ PPI. It is defined by normal viewing distance vs. PPI and it differs between device types (i.e. the PPI that is indistinguishable to the human eye when the device is viewed at "normal" distance). Viewing distance differs greatly between a TV set, a laptop, a tablet and a smartphone. Most TVs have pixel densities lower than 80PPI, but that doesn't matter because the viewing distance more than makes up for that. Most laptops look stunning with only 120-140 PPI (2011 Macbook Airs that are widely praised for their hi-res screens are around 128PPI). The "normal" viewing distance for a tablet (e.g. iPad) would be nearly twice that of a smartphone, thus the corresponding "retina" PPI would be lower, around 250PPI. A 2048x1536 9.7" (264PPI) display would be more than adequate to qualify as a "retina" display.

There's a Sony Ericsson phone that will exceed the iPhone 4 in terms of PPI. It has a 1280x720 4.3" screen. The new Nexus has the same resolution but with a larger screen.
 
There's a Sony Ericsson phone that will exceed the iPhone 4 in terms of PPI. It has a 1280x720 4.3" screen. The new Nexus has the same resolution but with a larger screen.

This resolution was obviously chosen because it allows 720p videos to run without any rescaling. The iPhone 4's resolution was similarly chosen because it allows older apps to be rescaled with simple pixel doubling.
 
I haven't read through all 160 posts prior to mine so my apologies if this was already mentioned but summer 2012 doesn't necessarily mean June or early July as in the past. Technically, summer doesn't end until September 21 (for us Northern Hemisphere folks, that is) so if it was released mid September, Apple would still me meeting a 'Summer Launch' and it would only be 3-4 weeks short of a full year since the 4S launch date.

Weren't iPod announcements usually made the first week of September in previous years? Making future iPhone announcements at the same time would make perfect sense.
 
[url=http://cdn.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png]Image[/url]
The source indicates that the iPad 3 is planned to launch in March and that it will be approximately 0.7 mm thicker than the iPad 2 due to the need to incorporate a dual light bar system for the higher-resolution display.
"Dual light bar system"? - Samsung Super AMOLED does not use this old tech, so it can be thinner and better.

The next iPhone is, however, said to carry a 4-inch display (up from 3.5 inches in the current iPhone)
4" is still too small. They need at least two iPhone models: 3.5" and 4.5". And perhaps the third 5.5" model to compete with 5.3" Galaxy Note. After all they do sell four MacBook screen sizes and no one complains about "fragmentation".

----------

Apple keeps their $80 billion in gold bars under the Cupertino headquarters.
Most of this money is actually overseas :D
 
I'm still going to say that that 4" tear drop design is for the next iPod Touch. Apple is going to push the Touch as a gaming device. The lack of update on the Touch is strange, thus imo Apple is going to do this new A5-powered 4" iPod Touch. The tagline would be HD gaming, HD videos, etc. It's kinda obvious seeing the plastic black volume buttons. Apple wouldn't do that on an iPhone. I don't think Apple would do a 4" iPhone. The most heard complaints about the screen size are people thinking the keyboard is too cramped (the funny thing is that nobody was complaining about that when the iPhone first launched, not until Android phones start getting into 4"+ sizes), but that problem is/going to be solved with Siri.
 
So let me get this straight...

1. You want the dpi lower so the text and graphics look more pixelated/stretched?

2. You don't want your phone to fit in a normal pocket comfortably.

3. You want your palm and fingers on you holding-hand to constantly be touching the screen and messing with the accuracy?
1. Was the iPhone 3GS pixelated? MacBooks look stunning with only 120-140 ppi
2. I don't keep my phone in a pocket. It's in holster on my belt.
3. I want bigger screen so I have bigger keyboard buttons and less "messing with the accuracy".
 
Last edited:
There's a Sony Ericsson phone that will exceed the iPhone 4 in terms of PPI. It has a 1280x720 4.3" screen. The new Nexus has the same resolution but with a larger screen.

It also isn't THAT much higher, 341 dpi vs 326 dpi, which only corresponds to an increase of 4.6%.

1. Was the iPhone 3GS pixelated? MacBooks look stunning with only 120-140 ppi
2. I don't keep my phone in a pocket. It's in holster on my belt.
3. I want bigger screen so I have bigger keyboard buttons and less "messing with the accuracy".

1. Totally irrelevant due to viewing distance. The 13" MacBook Air is "Retina Display" when viewed at a distance of 68 cm or more (65 cm for 11"-model).

2. LOL. I didn't know people actually use those. That's hilarious!
 
1. Was the iPhone 3GS pixelated? MacBooks look stunning with only 120-140 ppi
2. I don't keep my phone in a pocket. It's in holster on my belt.
3. I want bigger screen so I have bigger keyboard buttons and less "messing with the accuracy".

Don't give too much time to simple minded posters.

1. Everyone was fine with the iPhone screen from the 1st gen to the 3GS, and yes, as you said with the Macbook and Macbook Pros with 4 year old screen resolutions.

2. That poster says normal pocket like there is a measurable size for it. That person is also forgetting that we've had larger devices in our pockets for decades.

3. The screen issue will be something that goes back and forth until Apple makes an iPhone with a larger screen and smaller bezel. The small hands crowd will always find ways to justify small devices with tiny screens. I am glad that Apple will eventually have to make the screen bigger.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/9A405)

All I have to say to a summer iPhone 5 launch is, screw you Apple.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/9A405)

All I have to say to a summer iPhone 5 launch is, screw you Apple.
 
Or, rather, they are realizing the trade-off between device size on the one hand, and "things to put into the device" on the other. The iPhone was huge at its launch. Was that because Apple went against "miniaturization" or that they figured it needed to be that size to "do the trick"?

If they make a thicker ipad it'll be for sake of a bigger battery. Simple as that.

See: "miniaturization" - in my mind - means something like "development that secures smaller formfactors for "like" functionality". For instance generation x of a device is inherently larger than x+some. Therefor it is not "miniaturization" if iPad 3 is thicker than iPad 2 for whatever reason - your example with the iPhone is good - it has shown a tendency to shrink over time
 
The higher res screen is not on my important list for the Ipad3. I would like more ram as I am sick of the checkerboard....

Glenn
 
I don't get why screen size is such an issue, I mean why doesn't apple make multiples iPhones or iPads, they make multiple cinema displays, multiple iPods, multiple macbooks, multiple iMacs etc. Why doesn't apple give us a smaller 5 or 7 inch iPad I certainly would buy one or a 4-5 inch iPhone. Why is Apple so against the idea of a UMPC/PDA/MID device it seams like there a clear consumer demand for something like this, from there own user base in fact. I wouldn't mind a thicker iPad because a little bit of extra heft and weight goes a long way for making a device feel premium and substant in you hands. When I held a gtab 10.1, an iPad 2, Samsung Series 9, and a Macbook air the devices felt really flimsy and fragile and I was afraid of ripping of the lid of the macbook air, not to say these devices were poorly built but the lack of weight cause one to perceive lack of quality. The only feature I care about seeing in iPhone 5 or iPad 3 is the implementation of digital pen input for drawing and taking notes which would be perfect for a student and amateur artist like me. I know there are capactive styli out there but they kinda suck a lot (ie no pressure sensitivity, no palm rejection, or a fine tip)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.