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

Outlining the Case for 1334 x 750 and 2208 x 1242 iPhone 6 Retina Displays

One issue with the precise resolution Gruber is proposing is that they aren't multiples of 16 which I believe is required for macroblocking used to maximize efficiency in video codecs. This is why the 4" iPhone is 1136x640 which isn't the closest pixel count to 16:9 but is the closest that is a multiple of 16. Gruber may have the right idea with his resolutions, but if Apple is doing something along those lines they'll likely bump them up slightly to get multiples of 16.


EDIT:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macroblock

Looks like newer codecs allow 8x8 and 4x4 macroblocks. So perhaps multiples of 4 will be the constraint.
 
Last edited:
commander.data said:
Those resolutions give the 5.5" iPhone 2.7x more pixels than the 4.7" iPhone. It'll be interesting to see if Apple does anything with the GPU besides just a small clock speed bump otherwise the 5.5" may be underpowered to run things at native resolution. Given how the iPad 3 struggles handling it's native resolution compared to the previous iPad 2 hopefully this won't be repeated.
Click to expand...

That would be stupid. They need to be the same resolution. You hold the smaller one closer so it only makes sense.
 
Just please no protruding camera lens! I'm willing to return to the iPhone from Android if Apple plays their cards right.
 
4.7" thanks. If I wanted to read easier on the go, I'd carry my iPad.
Higher than Retina? Due to larger screen space no doubt.
 
this is no sense, look at what they have done with iPads, mini and big with the same resolution, I think they can be 1080p both 4,7 and 5,5. 1920x1080 @3x are 640x360 points, so more content, more sharpness and slightly bigger elements on 4,7" and more bigger elements on 5,5". 468ppi on 4,7 and 400ppi on 5,5, only one new resolution for developers.
 
kenroberts83 said:
This is just some dude's guess. No more newsworthy than most of the comments here.
Click to expand...

While I get that it is most likely a guess. He is a rather noteworthy "analyst" as Apple will usually feed him insider information to then feed to the public. He is almost always right.
 
The given 1334 x 750 resolution of the 4.7-inch iPhone 6 contrasts with information and photos shared by luxury modified iPhone vendor Feld & Volk earlier this week, which showed the display of the 4.7-inch iPhone 6 under a microscope with a pixel density higher than 326 ppi, perhaps 1704 x 960.
Click to expand...
No, no, no! That photo (under the microscope) has *exactly the same* pixels-per-inch as the 5. So that photo fully *supports* Gruber's estimate rather than contradicting it.
 
Outlining the Case for 1334 x 750 and 2208 x 1242 iPhone 6 Retina Displays

commander.data said:
Those resolutions give the 5.5" iPhone 2.7x more pixels than the 4.7" iPhone. It'll be interesting to see if Apple does anything with the GPU besides just a small clock speed bump otherwise the 5.5" may be underpowered to run things at native resolution. Given how the iPad 3 struggles handling it's native resolution compared to the previous iPad 2 hopefully this won't be repeated.
Click to expand...


A7 already runs the iPad's display with no problems. I believe A8 will manage any higher resolution with no issues, considering that it still has fewer pixels than a retina iPad.
 
bigchrisfgb said:
So hold on, if I got a 4.7 inch iPhone then everything on the screen would stay the same size? So I would still have to zoom in for some content? That pretty mud defeats the point in having a larger screen.

They did that with the 5, where I everything was the same size and all we got was a few additional lines of text. The whole point in going towards a larger screen size is so that zooming in to see/read content is no longer required.
Click to expand...

Individual UI elements (incl. the text in them) will have the same physical size. Content that is usually zoomed will of course zoom to the full (physical) size of the screen and thus be physically larger. All of Gruber's discussion about how much content is shown on the screen based on points does not apply to zoomable content like images or video but also webpages where one column zooms to fill the width of the screen (unless the website adjusts the amount of content per line in a webpage based on the resolution of the device it is viewed on, then all bets are off on how the website will react).
 
mirko.meschini said:
this is no sense, look at what they have done with iPads, mini and big with the same resolution, I think they can be 1080p both 4,7 and 5,5. 1920x1080 @3x are 640x360 points, so more content, more sharpness and slightly bigger elements on 4,7" and more bigger elements on 5,5". 468ppi on 4,7 and 400ppi on 5,5, only one new resolution for developers.
Click to expand...

The question (already discussed by Gruber) is whether potential buyers of the 5.5" model will be happy with not having more content and more pixels than the 4.7" phone. What do other phone manufacturers do? Are there some that offer the same number of pixels on differently sized phones? And what about tablets?
 
Abazigal said:
A7 already runs the iPad's display with no problems. I believe A8 will manage any higher resolution with no issues, considering that it still has fewer pixels than a retina iPad.
Click to expand...
Recent games like Modern Combat 5 have reduced graphics on the iPad Air compared to the iPhone 5s because the GPU is similar but there are a lot more pixels. A 4.7" and 5.5" sharing a similar A8 GPU but having big pixel count differences will be fine for common apps, but will be an issue for graphically intensive apps.
 
commander.data said:
One issue with the precise resolution Gruber is proposing is that they aren't multiples of 16 which I believe is required for macroblocking used to maximize efficiency in video codecs. This is why the 4" iPhone is 1136x640 which isn't the closest pixel count to 16:9 but is the closest that is a multiple of 16. Gruber may have the right idea with his resolutions, but if Apple is doing something along those lines they'll likely bump them up slightly to get multiples of 16.
Click to expand...
The closest pixel count is an odd number. I suspect that's why Apple chose 1136.

Furthermore, 1080 isn't a multiple of 16. So I don't think your theory holds.
 
manu chao said:
Individual UI elements (incl. the text in them) will have the same physical size. Content that is usually zoomed will of course zoom to the full (physical) size of the screen and thus be physically larger. All of Gruber's discussion about how much content is shown on the screen based on points does not apply to zoomable content like images or video but also webpages where one column zooms to fill the width of the screen (unless the website adjusts the amount of content per line in a webpage based on the resolution of the device it is viewed on, then all bets are off on how the website will react).
Click to expand...
Thats my whole point though. The reason why people want larger screen is that what appears on the screen is larger, not just adding more onto the screen. Apple made the mistake the last time with the 5 when they had a bigger screen but everything was the same size. People want a larger screen so they don't have to zoom in to read whats on a webpage, not because they want an additional line of webpage before having to scroll. If Apple do keep everything the same size then there is no point in creating a larger screened iPhone.

I don't think Apple are that oblivious behind the reasons to why people wanting a larger screen, and therefor I would make a guess and say that this rumour will not be true.
 
manu chao said:
The question (already discussed by Gruber) is whether potential buyers of the 5.5" model will be happy with not having more content and more pixels than the 4.7" phone. What do other phone manufacturers do? Are there some that offer the same number of pixels on differently sized phones? And what about tablets?
Click to expand...
Most phablets are blown up phones. Apple won't do that. Remember how the Nexus 7 had so much less screen estate than the iPad mini? I suspect something similar will occur to the 5.5". This will give the 5.5" a huge USP over other phablets.
 
I'm really ready for September 9th now. The rumors at this point are just going to be crazier and crazier until they spin well beyond reason or realism.

Developers have had to support applications for multiple resolutions and aspect ratios (see Android) for awhile now. Apple's hardware is just 10x easier to keep track of and create a testbed for. I don't think any resolution that Apple gives should be a surprise/hardship to any modern app developer who scales their UI to fit a percentage of the screen rather than pixel-perfectly aligning it.
 
bigchrisfgb said:
Thats my whole point though. The reason why people want larger screen is that what appears on the screen is larger, not just adding more onto the screen. Apple made the mistake the last time with the 5 when they had a bigger screen but everything was the same size. People want a larger screen so they don't have to zoom in to read whats on a webpage, not because they want an additional line of webpage before having to scroll. If Apple do keep everything the same size then there is no point in creating a larger screened iPhone.



I don't think Apple are that oblivious behind the reasons to why people wanting a larger screen, and therefor I would make a guess and say that this rumour will not be true.
Click to expand...


You can adjust the font size for that.
 
bigchrisfgb said:
Thats my whole point though. The reason why people want larger screen is that what appears on the screen is larger, not just adding more onto the screen. Apple made the mistake the last time with the 5 when they had a bigger screen but everything was the same size. People want a larger screen so they don't have to zoom in to read whats on a webpage, not because they want an additional line of webpage before having to scroll.
Click to expand...
No, your whole point is that what most people want are wider screens not taller screens because it is the width that is limiting what you do or see on the phone. The terms 'wider' and 'taller' here are based on the assumption that portrait use is the dominant one, technically what most people want is screens that are larger in dimension of what is the shorter edge as for example using the current phone in landscape orientation with the keyboard on, it is the number of lines of text that is limiting not the width of the line.
 
manu chao said:
No, your whole point is that what most people want are wider screens not taller screens because it is the width that is limiting what you do or see on the phone. The terms 'wider' and 'taller' here are based on the assumption that portrait use is the dominant one, technically it is screens that are larger in dimension of what is the shorter edge.
Click to expand...
Ugh stop the 'taller not wider' phrase already. It's 16:9 which is perfect.
 
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