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

[nagromme]

I look at my iPhone 5 and there are no pixels! Higher PPI than that is marketing driven (just ask Samsung et al) and carries a penalty in performance and battery life.

I'm sure Apple can get a 400+ PPI device to be fast and get enough usage on charge. But it would get EVEN more time and run EVEN faster with fewer wasteful pixels.

I hope they do LESS than 1080p, not more, on both sizes.

But Gruber's arguments (3x being developer-friendly especially) are reasonable. He could be right, and it fits with the "points" numbers Gurman found (which Gruber thinks were incorrectly assumed to be 2x instead of 3x).

I HOPE he's wrong, and they just keep the pixels, icons, etc. exactly the same current size, and just add more of them.

Keeping everything 2x is good for developers, for performance, and for battery life! That would mean 5.5" = 1564 × 880 (and 4.7" = 1334 × 750 as Gruber predicts). He places too much importance on his 3x size making icons 6% bigger. Sure, that's nice, but not vital.

But given those numbers Gurman dug up, I now fear Apple WILL do 3x on the big size. Pure marketing—in response to the same pure marketing move already made by others. (Screen size is not pure marketing: big glass has plusses and minuses and it's nice to have the choice. But PPI beyond 400? YES you can tell the difference--if you try hard enough and hold the phone really close and have perfect eyes. But it's meaningless in actual use. It's like filling your iPod with giant lossless music files when the practical difference is irrelevant 99.999% of the time with the headphones you use.)

Super-high wasteful PPI may nevertheless be the smart move for Apple--good marketing--but I'll be sorry for it (much like the useless and memory-wasting camera megapixel wars). The geek in me can enjoy the spec numbers being "greater than 1080p" but the actual USER in me will know it's a waste. You could tell me it's 2000 PPI—I simply can't tell. So many other factors make more difference in screen quality.

Oh, well. If it's got wasted pixels making it a bit lesser phone than it could be, it can still be a great phone overall.

 

[Alchematron]

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 a 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 more 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.

Count me in here, except I held on to the 4s, and can't wait for that big honking 5.5

 

[dyt1983]

edit: removed personal info.

 

[XTheLancerX]

Mmmm... I just like that the 4.7 has nice small bezels, if the bezels are nice and small like that, I will be pretty satisfied.

Most of these comments are still making more worried/annoyed that Apple would make two iPhone 6's, but one wouldn't be the flagship, like considerably lower specs, etc... I still can't understand why they would make 2 iPhones that are titled "iPhone 6" but one really isn't the "flagship" iPhone 6. What the heck? I guess I just don't want to get what would essentially be "the next iPhone 5C" like someone said... I really... REALLY... Do not want a freaking 5.5 inch screen. Please don't make me regret getting the 4.7, Apple. Please don't.

 

[mambo966]

iPhone 6 Large, or iPad Nano?

What if the 5.5 version is really an iPad Nano?

 

[nagromme]

Mmmm... I just like that the 4.7 has nice small bezels, if the bezels are nice and small like that, I will be pretty satisfied.

Most of these comments are still making more worried/annoyed that Apple would make two iPhone 6's, but one wouldn't be the flagship, like considerably lower specs, etc... I still can't understand why they would make 2 iPhones that are titled "iPhone 6" but one really isn't the "flagship" iPhone 6. What the heck? I guess I just don't want to get what would essentially be "the next iPhone 5C" like someone said... I really... REALLY... Do not want a freaking 5.5 inch screen. Please don't make me regret getting the 4.7, Apple. Please don't.

Just speculating here, but Apple may HAVE to reserve higher specs for the bigger phone. Some possible logical reasons:

1. if nobody in the world can make enough of certain parts to satisfy BOTH phones. (Remember, the iPhone sells in quantities that dwarf an individual competing model--because competing companies throw so many slightly-different models at the wall.) So the hardest-to-get parts might be limited to the lesser-selling (I'm assuming 5.5") choice. Apple can't sell parts it can't obtain.

2. The larger screen may need a faster CPU and more RAM just to keep pace with the lean and efficient 4.7" size. Pixels cost!

3. The bigger screen makes a thicker shell less noticeable (which is lucky because it also needs a bigger battery). And a thicker shell might allow a camera that won't fit in the thinner 4.7"

If anything like this comes to pass, don't fret over specs on paper: enjoy the 4.7 because it will be a great phone! And you won't need two hands.

 

[TouchMint.com]

Wouldn't it be nice if apple just told us so devs could make changes and apps wouldn't look like crap on the new phones?

 

[troop231]

Wouldn't it be nice if apple just told us so devs could make changes and apps wouldn't look like crap on the new phones?

Yup. They should've provided the correct tools in Xcode back at WWDC and just told us. The resizable iPhone simulators are garbage and impossible to design around.

 

[rendyr]

I am gladly have the lower resolution for extra one or two hours of battery. The current density of iPhone 5s is more than enough. I can't find the difference between 1080p on s5 and low resolution iPhone 5s.

 

[shinichimaki23]

john gruber is always inaccurate with worthless information. when I see the name jg, I stopped reading immediately.

 

[myforwik]

The given 1334 x 750 resolution of the 4.7-inch iPhone 6 contrasts with information shared by luxury modified iPhone vendor Feld & Volk earlier this week, which came with a photo showing the display of the 4.7-inch iPhone 6 under a microscope with a pixel density higher than 326 ppi, perhaps 1704 x 960. That resolution has also been cited in previous rumors, but Gruber claims in his post that an iPhone 6 with a resolution of 1704 x 960 would only work well for 4.0-inch displays, as it would not show any additional content compared to the iPhone 5 when measured in touch points.

Its funny... the microscope image is clearly 12.5 or 13 pixels per milli meter, which is 730 to 760 horizontal resolution. Not 960. So the 750 is looking even more likely.

I still don't understand why the person posted the microscope picture, but then claimed 960, even though it shows 750ish? Could it be that instead of millimeters the ruler on the image is actually showing 1/32s of an inch? And that the overlay that has been added of 1mm was wrong? That would make it 960.

 

[commander.data]

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.

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.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wj_Lyp6gN50

The iPad Air and iPhone 5s use similar A7 and in modern graphically intensive games like Modern Combat 5 some effects (bullet ejection, some textures, etc. admittedly not major differences) have to be pared back on the iPad Air compared to the iPhone 5s to account for the difference in resolution. Yes, in less-graphically intensive tasks like web browsing there won't be noticeable difference. A 2208 x 1242 5.5" iPhone will have 3.8x the pixels of the 4" iPhone and 2.7x the pixels of the proposed 1334 x 750 4.7" iPhone. If GPU performance between the 4.7" and 5.5" iPhone don't scale correspondingly, then future games that really push the 4" or 4.7" iPhone will either have to pare back their effects to maintain native resolution on the 5.5" iPhone or it'll have to render at a lower non-native resolution and then be scaled causing softness, either of which decreases the benefits of the higher resolution. Apple has been achieving a roughly 2x increase in graphics performance between SoC generations and differences between the iPad and iPhone variants are usually less than that which is why I am concerned whether GPU performance can scale in lockstep with these 3.8x and 2.7x increases in pixel count. Again this will only be an issue in graphically intensive situations, which isn't the majority of usage, so Apple will probably just accept it.

 

[Technarchy]

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.

3:2 would be unwieldy at 4.7" and 5.5". Works great in smaller sizes and tablet/labtop sizes, just not big screen phones.

 

[XMZ-250]

The retina iPad mini has 326 ppi compared to 264 ppi for the iPad Air. Does that mean the retina mini is the flagship iPad?

Not really, they are just the same screen resolution @ 2048x1536 but having a different screen size 9.7 on the air and 7.9 on the mini. Expect to have a higher ppi on the mini given to its smaller screen size and same resolution as the air.

 

[FloatingBones]

Again with the "Apple Journalist"?

He writes and hosts a podcast about Apple products, software, and strategy. If you read this page, you'll see that he grosses almost $500K/year for website advertising sales. He also gets significant chunk revenue from his podcast, although I'm guessing it's significantly less the website revenue.

He's a professional that writes about Apple. You don't have to like it, clearly there are thousands of people who value his writing highly. His compensation is north of the 95th percentile for traditional journalists.

What alternative descriptor would you use for someone who writes and discusses the tech industry -- and has a viable business model for his writing? Unless you can suggest some alternative that makes sense, "journalist" sounds just fine to me.

 

[subjonas]

I don't know if that qualifies it as flagship, but like you, I definitely use my Retina Mini way more than my Air.



I often carry my iPad Mini around in my back pocket, it fits in all my jeans that I can think of (and they're just Levi's, Lucky, AG, etc. size 32 or 33--nothing with strangely large pockets). I think any iPhone won't be a problem until we're at something like the iPhone 9 with 10" screen.

Really?? I returned my iPad Mini precisely because it couldn't fit in my jeans back pockets (also because I want something more palm-able). I wear size 32 as well and it was a good 0.5" too wide. I think all my jeans are Old Navy though. I dunno, maybe they have smaller pockets. I'm planning on getting the 5.5" in place of the Mini. Well, first I'm going to try it as a phablet, but if I find it to be too annoyingly big, I'll switch to a small phone and use it as strictly a tablet.

 

[jkichline]

Android is doomed

and looks like Apple is going to embrace the larger scale phone and make it the flagship iPhone.

Android is doomed. This was the only reason (well and cost) that users went Android. Apple is systematically removing the high-end from the Android market even further. That's going to relegate it to the low-end market... which Apple will probably address next, but there's no real rush.

----------

Why would they introduce more fragmentation into their iPhone line?

Fragmentation only occurs when you have scores of iOS versions that are unable to allow great apps to be created. Different hardware, sensor miscalibration, skins, hacks and more.

In comparison, more than 90% of devices run iOS 7 which contains the SDK needed to handle dynamic scaling of content. iOS 8 even more so. I know as a developer that I need to change my very old app (2010) to use these more modern frameworks.

But... you can bet your bottom dollar that my app will work on the newer version with maybe some letter boxing or something. I can then get the device and test thoroughly and be done.

So I wouldn't call it fragmentation if it doesn't pull any additional resources on the developer to support those devices (which it won't).

 

[bjones521]

Android is doomed. This was the only reason (well and cost) that users went Android. Apple is systematically removing the high-end from the Android market even further. That's going to relegate it to the low-end market... which Apple will probably address next, but there's no real rush.

----------



Fragmentation only occurs when you have scores of iOS versions that are unable to allow great apps to be created. Different hardware, sensor miscalibration, skins, hacks and more.

In comparison, more than 90% of devices run iOS 7 which contains the SDK needed to handle dynamic scaling of content. iOS 8 even more so. I know as a developer that I need to change my very old app (2010) to use these more modern frameworks.

But... you can bet your bottom dollar that my app will work on the newer version with maybe some letter boxing or something. I can then get the device and test thoroughly and be done.

So I wouldn't call it fragmentation if it doesn't pull any additional resources on the developer to support those devices (which it won't).

Android is doomed?? Don't be naive....I highly doubt the 5.5 iPhone will start at 199. Thus...there will still be an advantage for Samsung, HTC etc in regards to pricing, I hope i'm wrong though

 

[Ichabod.]

I'm going to have to start my macrumors moratorium early if all this exciting news keeps leaking out.

*Fingers crossed for not having to wait three months for the 5.5"*

 

[osofast240sx]

Android is doomed?? Don't be naive....I highly doubt the 5.5 iPhone will start at 199. Thus...there will still be an advantage for Samsung, HTC etc in regards to pricing, I hope i'm wrong though

History has shown consumers are willing to pay a premium for Apple products.

 

[odds]

Why would they introduce more fragmentation into their iPhone line?

Great job! You didn't read the source article! In all seriousness, though, it's a very intelligent write-up and I highly recommend reading it. Gruber's pretty smart.

 

[pipa]

I guarantee you come the 9th apple is going to have a HUGE surprise for us in regards to the a8 chip. Thst thing is going to be a beast. And with the metal API it's going to be a beautiful thing.

 

[Eadfrith]

Hmmm...lots of conflicting rumours lately, I guess it just means we may be in for a surprise when they finally reveal them.

 

[sdugoten]

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.

Just FYI, unlike the US, the "standard" size for female are 5"+ in Asia because they only want to carry 1 device in their purse and the screen has to be large enough to watch Chinese Drama/Korean drama/Japan Drama/Movie ..etc. (The main functionality using a smartphone in Asia for the female)

 

[cocky jeremy]

Why would they introduce more fragmentation into their iPhone line?

Because they're only doing 2-3 screen sizes, at most, for a total of 4.. ever. That's at, what, 5 different resolutions when you consider pre-Retina iPhones? Hell, there's probably 20 different resolutions or more on just 4.7" Android phones. It isn't nearly the "fragmentation" Android has, and never will be.