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

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Why would they introduce more fragmentation into their iPhone line?

Dollars. Apple likes money. Bigger screens will sell like mad. Samsung and others have already proven that bigger screens sell well even without iOS. Apple is going to cash in like never before. App programers will cash in too. Adapting to some fragmentation will just be part of adapting to drive all that cashing in.

 

[siurpeeman]

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.

it's 1920 that's the multiple of 16. 1080 is the respective multiple of 9.

 

[truettray]

I'm pretty excited about the 4.7 inch phone... but I still can't believe that people want anything bigger than 5 inches in a phone! I would be so disappointed if the smaller phone missed out on features because it's the "inferior" product.

 

[scupking]

Ok so why does the 5.5" have a much bigger bezel then the 4.7"?

 

[TC03]

it's 1920 that's the multiple of 16. 1080 is the respective multiple of 9.

Ah. Well good point then.

----------

Ok so why does the 5.5" have a much bigger bezel then the 4.7"?

Cause it's a mockup? It's a guess.

 

[ravenvii]

Furthermore, 1080 isn't a multiple of 16. So I don't think your theory holds.

Incorrect -- 1920 x 1080 is a multiple of 16.

Imagine your screen as a graph, each 'box' being 4 x 4, or 16, pixels. Those 'macroblocks' are important for, among other things, the above-mentioned video optimization algorithms.

 

[mdlooker]

So from the sounds of it, the 4.7 is a repeat.

 

[DoctorKrabs]

Here is what the home screen would look like at 1334 x 750:
Physical icon sizes are the same.

 

[manu chao]

Ugh stop the 'taller not wider' phrase already. It's 16:9 which is perfect.

I didn't say "taller not wider", I actually said the opposite if any.

 

[iMacmatician]

Incorrect -- 1920 x 1080 is a multiple of 16.

Imagine your screen as a graph, each 'box' being 4 x 4, or 16, pixels. Those 'macroblocks' are important for, among other things, the above-mentioned video optimization algorithms.

Oh, I thought commander.data meant 16x16 blocks.

Then the closest resolution to 1334x750 that has pixel counts in each direction a multiple of 4 (and is also 326 PPI on a 4.70" display, although the real display might be a few hundredth of an inch longer/shorter) is 1336x752.

EditIt looks like he may have actually meant 16x16. Still, regarding the smaller macroblocks, 1336 and 752 are both divisible by 8.

 

[Traverse]

Well, I currently have to hold my 4S a few inches closer than what Apple deems a "normal" distance and I clearly see some pixilation. I was hoping for a bump in PPI. However, I would assuredly holed a 4.7" screen farther back than a 5.5" screen so the issue would be less pronounced, if existent at all.

 

[Rogifan]

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.

In his post Gruber specifically mentioned that none of this is inside information.

 

[Born Again]

Shut up gruber

 

[EM2013]

I can already imagine samsung's next commercial if this is true.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

I'm pretty excited about the 4.7 inch phone... but I still can't believe that people want anything bigger than 5 inches in a phone!

Millions and millions of people have wanted >5" so badly they chose Android over iOS to get it. And a chunk of them have purchased >6" screens.

Key: stop thinking of it as a phone. For some, the phone usage is a very small part of the overall usage. If you look at it for "the rest", then it's a bigger screen, pocketable computer. Once you mentally shift away from the phone portion of a 5s, the screen is really small for "the rest".

And, as I've said before, we're seeing these sizes as big and huge because we're accustomed to 4". Apple knows they can woo most of us to 4.7" easily enough. Who they may be after with the 5.5" screen is the Android crowd who are very accustomed to 5" to 6" and bigger screens. To some of them, 5.5" may seem small and 4.7" may seem too small. So, if true, Apple will get our money and their money too.

 

[Casiotone]

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.

You're confusing issues. Assuming Apple increases resolution and keep ~326PPI, buttons and interface elements will stay the same physical size, but the content itself (images, video, webpages) will of course appear larger, as these types of content are automatically resized to fill the screen.

Edit: Actually, it will not only make webpages larger but also show more content at the same time because the navigation bars will occupy a smaller percentage of the screen, which would not be the case if they simply blown up the whole interface.

 

[FrankieTDouglas]

I just wish the new phones were in a 3:2 ratio rather than 16:9. I still prefer that ratio from the 4S over what I have now in the 5.

 

[furi0usbee]

I take all my tech pics on grass...

 

[blackcrayon]

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.

Won't be a problem at all. iPad 3? What about the iPad 4 with its A6X - that doesn't struggle. iPad Air and Retina mini with their A7... Those don't struggle. Assuming Apple puts a GPU at least as good or better than the A7 in the iPhone 6 (guaranteed I'm sure), they'll be well covered.

 

[commander.data]

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.

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

You're right. Looks like newer codecs allow 8x8 and 4x4 macroblocks.

 

[Zinthar]

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.

That's still fewer pixels than the retina iPad has, and an A7 that's nearly identical to that in the iPhone 5S has little trouble with it.

----------

I just wish the new phones were in a 3:2 ratio rather than 16:9. I still prefer that ratio from the 4S over what I have now in the 5.

I prefer that ratio for smaller phones, but I think it would make the 5.5" iPhone too wide, and Apple probably would like to keep all of their iPhone sizes going forward the same ratio.

 

[Casiotone]

...(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).

I agree with your post, but just to address this last point, I think Safari always report the screen width as 1024 pixels on every iOS device, so websites shouldn't treat the 4.7" differently.

That means that the content will be the same on a 4.7" or 5.5", but proportionally larger which is I think what we all want (full webpages are barely legible on a 4" iPhone without zooming).

I think that a lot of those who complain about the lack of PPI on the iPhone, saying "I can see the pixels!" are the type of people that try to read full webpages without zooming. Since the text is very small when viewing a page like this, it is easier to notice the pixels. For very small text like this, a higher PPI would make a bigger difference.

But on both the 4.7" and 5.5" iPhones, webpages will appear bigger, including the text, which will get much more defined and easier to read even at the same PPI, pixels will be much less noticeable.

 

[Moto G]

It always astounds me how a "bot" can write "news stories". If, as the OP implies, this IS a bot, then this "news" is even LESS worth reading, surely?

 

[Tubamajuba]

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.

Not necessarily. Browsing desktop sites on Safari is only one usage scenario of an iPhone. Most other scenarios involve apps or websites designed to display content specifically made for the iPhone, therefore zooming in isn't necessary no matter what the screen size is. I would rather have more content than larger content, and it seems like that's what the 4.7 will provide. The 5.5 seems like it will have the best of both worlds.

 

[zedsdead]

Gruber's reasoning is very well thought out.

It does jive with early rumors that the 5.5" was to have a much higher density display.

Also, it makes sense given the rumored battery sizes. The 4.7" battery is marginally bigger, thus the screen pixel density is probably in line with that increase.

The 5.5" battery that has been rumored is far bigger, so a much higher density screen makes complete sense and would compliment it well.