Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Next iPhone Screen Resolution Confirmed at 960x640

If they do name it the iPhone HD there are going to be quite a few confused people out there that buy apps with HD in the name, only to find that it is the iPad only version of the app.
I'm going to have to buy the biggest capacity version, because movies, pictures and apps are going to get much bigger with the increased resolution.
Can't Wait!!!
 
SevenInchScrew said:
If they do end up calling this new phone the "iPhone HD" I'm going to really laugh when everyone around here, predictably, thinks nothing of it, and calls it the best thing ever. Yet, when the "Zune HD" comes out, everyone here laughs at its screen and notes that it isn't HD.

Reality check, 960x640 is very high-res, but it certainly isn't HD. Not even close. I guess I shouldn't be surprised though. The term "HD" is so overused these days, it almost has no true meaning or value as a descriptor. Just tack it on to any item these days, and call it awesome. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The definition of HD :

The minimum is 576p 704×576

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-definition_video#Standard_high-definition_video_modes
 
I don't know if I'm ready to believe this until a Vietnamese website has actually confirmed it.
 
Agree:

- It's good to see rumors over the weekend

- double resolution is handy from several perspectives

- I would have preferred also to have the physical size increased 20-50%.

- iPad compatibility is the expectation

Note:

Lacking the yellow pixels and the Mr. Sulu endorsement. :)
 
marksman said:
I don't think anyone here cares or ever comments about the Zune any more, so don't worry. Microsoft could announce the Zune printed gold bars and nobody would care, that is how irrelevant it has become.
Click to expand...
My point wasn't about the relevance, or lack there of, with the Zune HD. I was only talking about how everyone here just lambasted Microsoft for putting the "HD" moniker in the name of a device that didn't have an actual HD resolution screen. Yet, now it seems like this new iPhone might be called the "iPhone HD" and even though the screen is well short of any real HD resolution, everyone here is just fine with the name. Again, not that I'm surprised with that reaction around these parts.
 
espanta said:
so is this 'real' HD? from my understanding 'HD' is a pretty loose term and while it is great that the next iPhone will have 960x640 resolution does that mean it still can't play 720P material?
Will it be able to record at 720P, even though that is a higher resolution than it has on the screen?
Click to expand...

HD is relative to screen size. 960x640 on a screen this size is HD.

Anyone that claims otherwise may consider what would happen if 1080P was playing back on a 90 foot jumbo tron... 1 inch pixels. But it's High Def, right? Maybe a couple miles away it is.

As far as recording 720P, we'll find out in June.
 
I have my own theory on the whole screen being smaller ordeal......the actual viewing screen will be the same, but the "screen" will be smaller.....if you look at the iPhone in direct sunlight, you will notice something....so you have the entire screen which is that dark tan color, right? well when you turn it on and look at it in direct sunlight, the edges of that screen aren't displaying anything....so I think that even though this new screen may be a little smaller, your going to view exactly the same thing as before, as far as screen real estate goes...

I know apple wouldn't just change the size of the screen, given the keyboards and everything...I can type an entire sentence without even looking at it and have about 90% accuracy....

thoughts?
 
Peace said:
The definition of HD :

The minimum is 576p 704×576

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-definition_video#Standard_high-definition_video_modes
Click to expand...
From your own delightfully cherry-picked link....
Wikipedia said:
576p is considered HD in Australia only
Click to expand...
So, I guess if you are an Aussie, and you really want to scale back your expectations of what is considered HD, then sure. This new phone is TOTALLY a high-def device. But, all of us normal, sensible people will still scoff and laugh at you.
 
slipper said:
Is anyone disappointed it doesn't use an OLED display?
Click to expand...
My guess is that Apple acquired a variety of display samples and after rounds and rounds of rigorous testing, Steve himself picked the part that will be in the upcoming iPhone.

Here's my understanding of the current OLED status: it functions great under a limited number of conditions (e.g., it functions poorly in direct sunlight), durability & longevity of the parts are questionable, it's decidedly more expensive, and suppliers couldn't provide enough parts for the anticipated iPhone production volumes anyhow.

The last point is key. Even if suppliers sold every single OLED display unit to Apple (and stopped shipping to other companies), they still would come up short.

Apple probably selected the best part considering a variety of factors (I'm sure I missed some).
 
msb3079 said:
While 960 X 640 certainly doesn't meet TV HD requirements, (which is fine since it's NOT A TV) it will certainly meet my personal definition of "high definition" and be clearer than... well almost ANYTHING, since it will have so many pixels on a 3.5" screen as opposed to a 50" screen of a TV. The pixel density will be out of this world. Can't wait.
Click to expand...

Spot on.

If you're watching a movie on a display that small, 320 dpi is crazy good. You're a hair's breath away from 720p on a handheld device. Unless you watch films with a loupe from your dark room you'll never see the difference between "portable HD (960 x 640)" and "big-@ss plasma/LCD tv HD (720p/1080p)" resolutions on an iPhone. Sheesh.

You want to see every hair on Chewbacca's muzzle as he lets out one of his monosyllabic unintelligible groans (that someone onscreen always manages to construe as a meaningful compound sentence)? If you are over 35, your freaking eyes probably couldn't resolve that level of detail without bifocals anyway.

300 dpi in color can make a decent still photo print. A 320 dpi, constantly refreshing progressive scan display? Man, that'll be gorgeous. At this point, the limitations of the codecs and/or video processing will be the only obstacles to perfect images.

This all reminds me of the sample rate spec war for pro audio. Once you get to 48k (with a theoretical 24k high end response) you've achieved overkill. Every double-blind ABX study, even among elite studio engineers, proves that higher sample rates are completely pointless unless you are BOTH a) in a sound lab with equipment that can actually reproduce audio signals higher in frequency to 20k, AND b) you are not human--rather, you are a dog or a bat with ears that can HEAR ultra high frequencies. If neither are true, then your "audiophile" 96k recordings are expensive monuments to your wealth and gullibility.

I'll say that 320 dpi is probably at the overkill point, at least for anyone over 40. It's all pointless spec-fight nonsense from here on out.
 
The "hi res screen" won't mean crap if Apple is still shipping crappy YELLOW lcd's on the phones. Ala, 3GS. The screens on those phones were and still are - HORRIBLE.

If that has been fixed, great. If not, Apple can keep it. :mad:
 
billyjoegibsonx said:
Wait...so if we wanna use apps we have the now on our current phones there going to appear blurry/pixelated? And to get a nice sharp crisp lookin app we'll need to buy new apps with the HD title like ipad? That sucks! All the developers should be made to update their apps to the proper resolution of thr current iphone and if we decide to buy it then it should be compatible with both iphone/ipad! Its just getting confusing now :( and who wants to pay for two apps which are essentially the same app ? :(
Click to expand...

You're right. Apple should just stop upgrading the iPhone hardware. Does their madness know no bounds?

If you're so content with the current iPhone and its low-res apps, then why don't you just avoid this huge, beautiful new upgrade that will finally put the iPhone ahead of the competition on specs? You obviously can't afford it. Devs gotta eat. They aren't slaves, and shouldn't be "made" to do your bidding.

On a separate note, I've been saying this HD thing for a long time. The pixel doubled iPhone apps won't have to be doubled anymore. That would be nice. I'm betting that Apple provides an easy upgrade path to developers in the SDK for their existing apps. Most devs will probably do free upgrades IMO, but can still do what they want. The market will decide who wins that. The iPad was a new product line. Don't expect mirrored results.

You would think that Apple would want their devs to have some time to upgrade their graphics in time for launch. Perhaps it will be released later rather than sooner? Though pixel doubling on an iPhone won't look nearly as bad as on a blown up iPad screen. Remember, it's still the same physical dimension. Like printing a 3.5" diagonal image at 163dpi and 330dpi (or whatever the exact dimensions are). At that size, not a huge difference. But taking a 163dpi 3.5" diagonal image and blowing it up to 9" diagonal? Yeah, that's the iPad.

Neat that the new iPhone will be a higher resolution than most standard print (300dpi).
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 1.6; en-us; Archos5 Build/Donut) AppleWebKit/528.5+ (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/3.1.2 Mobile Safari/525.20.1)

A higher resolution screen was a must! It seems Apple have delivered. :)
 
Justinf79 said:
I was really hoping for a slightly bigger display, of say, 3.7/3.8".
Click to expand...

I have to agree - I'm looking forward to it but 3.4" with such a high resolution seems kind of pointless.
I'm glad it's fully doubled for scaling but.... I'm also sad in a way it's so goddamn high that my eyes will have trouble noticing most of it.
 
AbSoluTc said:
The "hi res screen" won't mean crap if Apple is still shipping crappy YELLOW lcd's on the phones. Ala, 3GS. The screens on those phones were and still are - HORRIBLE.

If that has been fixed, great. If not, Apple can keep it. :mad:
Click to expand...

You don't suffer from jaundice do you?
 
SevenInchScrew said:
So, I guess if you are an Aussie, and you really want to scale back your expectations of what is considered HD, then sure. This new phone is TOTALLY a high-def device. But, all of us normal, sensible people will still scoff and laugh at you.
Click to expand...

Find me a High Definition 1080P television with 320 DPI. A 50" wide screen with 320 DPI would have 16,000 pixels across... now that's just a smidge higher definition than 1,920 is it not?

Seriously, what am I missing here? I might be wrong but this rumored screen seems ultra high def, not just high def....
 
blackpond said:
HD is relative to screen size. 960x640 on a screen this size is HD.

Anyone that claims otherwise may consider what would happen if 1080P was playing back on a 90 foot jumbo tron... 1 inch pixels. But it's High Def, right? Maybe a couple miles away it is.

As far as recording 720P, we'll find out in June.
Click to expand...

The massive new screen at Cowboys Stadium is 1088 X 2432 so it achieves 1080p resolution. You are right it is all relative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back