If Apple were to adopt these screen resolutions, it would seem very strange to me. Of course this is perfectly possible, as Apple has suprised us several times before. And who knows what goes on inside the minds of these guys.
But I would say the following about these screen sizes and resolutions (and please let me know whether you agree with me or not
):
iPhone 6:
First of all, 4.7" is a very large display size to replace the 4". I wonder which size would the iPhone screen be if the bezel around the screen would be completely eliminated, but I guess it wouldn't be nowhere near 4.7". 4.7" is large and may be not so comfortable on the hands of the user. Perhaps Apple would release a 4.7" iPhone, but keep the smaller 4" version around. It may be dangerous to apply such radical and deep changes to a very popular product, axing the 4" iPhone. People might start disliking the iPhone because of the added size. Apple has played safe in the past, and it would be strange to see such a bold move right now.
As for the resolution, it doesn't make too much sense for me. The current iPhone, having a 1136x640 resolution crammed in a 4" screen, has a 325 ppi. A 4.7" screen with a 1280x720 resolution would actually have 312 ppi, a downgrade from the previous product. Although a 312 ppi phone can still be called retina, the downgrade here may be obvious.
The 5.7" version brings additional perplexity. It would be a giant iPhone, and that whole story of being able to use the iPhone with just one hand would just sink. It would be a phablet, after Tim Cook bashed toaster-refrigerators. It wouldn't make much sense.
As for the resolution... 1920x1080 on a 5.7" screen would equal to 386 ppi. The bigger iPhone would have more pixel density than the 4.7" version, which doesn't make much sense, since users tend to look at larger screens at a distance.
In addition to all this mess, iOS would have to be substantially update to make sense of these new resolutions. And apps would as well. Apple used careful mechanisms in the past to not break screen resolutions in iOS (first, it quadrupled the screen resolution, so it went from 480x320 to 960x640, and apps could still be used at the same screen size; then, it added vertical pixels only, going to a 1136x640 resolution, which allowed old apps to still be used although not benefitting from the added space). Two new iPhones with different resolutions would make all this effort pretty much worthless.
And Apple has become the master of making products with custom display resolutions, which no other manufacturer uses. Why would they succumb to the same mainstream resolutions of the high-end Android devices?
iPad 5:
The iPad 5 with a thinner bezel is very likely to happen.
As for the new iPad with a 12.9" screen and a 2732x2048 resolution... well, that remains to be seen. Anyway, a 2732x2048 resolution does not represent a perfect 4:3 screen ratio. It would be some sort of 4:2.9985 screen ratio. Strange, isn't it?
Such a screen would have a 264 ppi, which is also slightly higher than the one found in the 9.7" iPad (263 ppi).
One could also notice that such 12.9" iPad would have more pixels than the 15" retina MacBook Pro. Sounds a bit weird to me, considering the fact that it's an iPad we're talking about.
Also, I guess it wouldn't make sense to have a 7.9" and a 9.7 iPads with the same screen resolution (2048x1536) and a bigger one with a higher resolution.
iPad mini:
That one makes sense. And the one that makes most sense of all. It may happen. Or it may not. But at least it makes some sense.
MacBook Air:
This one puzzles me. I wasn't expecting a 2304x1440 resolution on a 12" screen.
The pixel density would be similar to the one in the 13" retina MacBook Pro (about 226 ppi). That makes sense. If the retina MacBook Pro is supposed to be the high-end offering, then it makes sense that the MacBook Air, being the thin-and-light consumer laptop, sports a smaller and lower-resolution display. It also would hint at a redesigned MacBook Air.
But here is the downside: if this is true, then competitors are already much ahead of Apple. There are several ultrabooks being released with much higher display resolutions. The Zenbook Infinity and the Acer Aspire S7 both have a 2560x1440 resolution. Dell is also updating its line and launching the XPS 11. Samsung is already selling a 13" ultrabook with a 3200x1800 resolution. These screen resolutions match or even surpass the resolutions of the very high end (and much more expensive) MacBook Pros with retina displays. So, Apple is late to the party here, and it is sub-par. If Apple adopts a 2304x1440 resolution for the Air, then it will be the lowest resolution among all high-resolution ultrabook displays. Underwhelming.
