But they didn't just conform to the industry. The iPad mini is 7.9" and 4x3, so it is actually much larger than the 7" 16x9 displays of Android. Of course, the same people who fault the iPhone for having a "much smaller" screen than the 4.7-5" Android phones seem to round the iPad mini's size down to the Nexus 7.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Supply Chain Sources Feed Speculation on Apple's Display Plans for Future Devices
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But they didn't just conform to the industry. The iPad mini is 7.9" and 4x3, so it is actually much larger than the 7" 16x9 displays of Android. Of course, the same people who fault the iPhone for having a "much smaller" screen than the 4.7-5" Android phones seem to round the iPad mini's size down to the Nexus 7.
I see it being inevitable and it's called differentiation. And there must be a technical smart solution for it so that it does not become too fragmented.
Also - as soon as Apple makes changes it is usually demonstratively different. So don't be surprised if/when they launch these larger iPhones - but I suspect they are working on a design iteration that will take better advantage of the bigger size.
And flexible amoled makes perfect sense for a potential iWatch. The Samsung is just stupid and unimaginative. It needs to capture our minds and push the envelope further. Here is one that hopes that the iWatch will be for smart watches what iPhone was for smart phones
Also - as soon as Apple makes changes it is usually demonstratively different. So don't be surprised if/when they launch these larger iPhones - but I suspect they are working on a design iteration that will take better advantage of the bigger size.
And flexible amoled makes perfect sense for a potential iWatch. The Samsung is just stupid and unimaginative. It needs to capture our minds and push the envelope further. Here is one that hopes that the iWatch will be for smart watches what iPhone was for smart phones
No!
By going 4.7", Apple would give up the spot of being the single company that is still releasing powerful and small devices, while even the "Mini" models from other companies are big.
And the resolutions and screen sizes stated in the article are also very unlikely.
They differ from the usual doubling of resolutions and the smaller one has even less pixels per inch than current iPhones!
The iPhone 4, 4s, 5 and 5s have 326dpi, the new display of the 4.7" display would have only 312dpi.
The 5.7" display has a resolution/size that leads to a higher dpi-ratio than current iPhones, but not by a huge margin, with 386dpi.
But: Current high-end Android devices have DPI ratios up to 469 dpi, like the HTC One.
And yes, the resolution is noticeable better.
So a 5.7" iPhone would have a worse display than current Android devices and the 4.7" iPhone (iPhone 6c?!?!) would have a display that's worse than current iPhones.
And even worse - Apple would need to manufacture two DIFFERENT displays for them, which is more expensive.
Remember that they started using the iPhone 5 display in the iPod Touches, because - well, it's much better than the old ones and - costs less to manufacture only a single display type.
The resolution they are stating for the 4.7" display would be much better for a display with a size of 4.5 inches - because that's 326dpi - the dpi of the current displays.
And for the larger iPhone (iPhone 6), maybe a resolution of 2272x1280 (doubled iPhone 5 resolution) @ 5.6 inches, having the same DPI as the HTC One) or 5.9 inches, the same DPI as the Samsung Galaxy S4.
That way, we would have a doubled resolution, making it easier for developers.
Another option for the smaller iPhone would be using the same resolution it's using now, but using a 4.9" display - that way, they could use the display they're using in the larger iPads.
I think that's the most reasonable way to go for Apple.
They'll be able to re-use the iPad-displays and developers won't need to support a new 1280x720-resolution that's only used in the iPhone 6c.
So, imho the most likely screen sizes will be (from a engineering point of view):
Small iPhone 6: 4.9" display with 1136x640 pixels - re-use iPad displays and no need for developers to change anything in their apps.
Big iPhone 6: 5.6 to 5.9" display with 2272x1280 pixels - needs a new display with higher resolution, but is on par with current high-end Android DPI (440-470 DPI), developers won't need to change much, as one pixel now will become 4 pixels with the new display, probably no changes needed at all.
PS: Q2'14?
LOL, never!
Q3'14 is much more likely.
By going 4.7", Apple would give up the spot of being the single company that is still releasing powerful and small devices, while even the "Mini" models from other companies are big.
And the resolutions and screen sizes stated in the article are also very unlikely.
They differ from the usual doubling of resolutions and the smaller one has even less pixels per inch than current iPhones!
The iPhone 4, 4s, 5 and 5s have 326dpi, the new display of the 4.7" display would have only 312dpi.
The 5.7" display has a resolution/size that leads to a higher dpi-ratio than current iPhones, but not by a huge margin, with 386dpi.
But: Current high-end Android devices have DPI ratios up to 469 dpi, like the HTC One.
And yes, the resolution is noticeable better.
So a 5.7" iPhone would have a worse display than current Android devices and the 4.7" iPhone (iPhone 6c?!?!) would have a display that's worse than current iPhones.
And even worse - Apple would need to manufacture two DIFFERENT displays for them, which is more expensive.
Remember that they started using the iPhone 5 display in the iPod Touches, because - well, it's much better than the old ones and - costs less to manufacture only a single display type.
The resolution they are stating for the 4.7" display would be much better for a display with a size of 4.5 inches - because that's 326dpi - the dpi of the current displays.
And for the larger iPhone (iPhone 6), maybe a resolution of 2272x1280 (doubled iPhone 5 resolution) @ 5.6 inches, having the same DPI as the HTC One) or 5.9 inches, the same DPI as the Samsung Galaxy S4.
That way, we would have a doubled resolution, making it easier for developers.
Another option for the smaller iPhone would be using the same resolution it's using now, but using a 4.9" display - that way, they could use the display they're using in the larger iPads.
I think that's the most reasonable way to go for Apple.
They'll be able to re-use the iPad-displays and developers won't need to support a new 1280x720-resolution that's only used in the iPhone 6c.
So, imho the most likely screen sizes will be (from a engineering point of view):
Small iPhone 6: 4.9" display with 1136x640 pixels - re-use iPad displays and no need for developers to change anything in their apps.
Big iPhone 6: 5.6 to 5.9" display with 2272x1280 pixels - needs a new display with higher resolution, but is on par with current high-end Android DPI (440-470 DPI), developers won't need to change much, as one pixel now will become 4 pixels with the new display, probably no changes needed at all.
PS: Q2'14?
LOL, never!
Q3'14 is much more likely.
If Apple truly is getting into the tv market they will have a hard time. The tv market is different in quite a few substantial ways from the computer market:
1. The buyers are (generally) different
2. This is a high volume low yield race to the bottom
3. Build quality actually hurts in some ways (More on that in a sec)
The reason they did well with the ipod, ipad and iphone was ease of use, build quality, and a new experience. All of that can be changed up on the computer world, while none of it really matters for tvs.
For starters, it's a tv. It sits there. It doesn't matter what the build quality is as long as it's thin and doesn't catch on fire.
In fact, bad build quality is helpful in a lot of ways, the cheap plastic they use helps make these things wall mountable. If you used aluminum in a 55" tv you wouldn't have much of a chance of wall mounting it.
For another, you can make smart tvs, but really, in the end it's a tv. The biggest changes are resolution, and picture quality. There's not much to work with.
I'm sure many fanboys will disagree, but if Apple goes into the tv business with $5000 55" tvs they will fail.
1. The buyers are (generally) different
2. This is a high volume low yield race to the bottom
3. Build quality actually hurts in some ways (More on that in a sec)
The reason they did well with the ipod, ipad and iphone was ease of use, build quality, and a new experience. All of that can be changed up on the computer world, while none of it really matters for tvs.
For starters, it's a tv. It sits there. It doesn't matter what the build quality is as long as it's thin and doesn't catch on fire.
In fact, bad build quality is helpful in a lot of ways, the cheap plastic they use helps make these things wall mountable. If you used aluminum in a 55" tv you wouldn't have much of a chance of wall mounting it.
For another, you can make smart tvs, but really, in the end it's a tv. The biggest changes are resolution, and picture quality. There's not much to work with.
I'm sure many fanboys will disagree, but if Apple goes into the tv business with $5000 55" tvs they will fail.
I want a big screen too but I think the Xperia Z ultra is a little too big but it sure is built nice and I even thought about one but why did Sony leave a flash off it. That alone made it a no go for me. Honestly I think it was designed as a table and then they said, toss in voice at the last minute.
Hope Apple releases a bigger phone myself. The 5" range works for me
Different standards. If Apple suddenly released a phone of Samsung quality everyone would be like "woah what garbage is this". But people will buy the same quality from Samaung.
In Samsung's defence I think their hardware is not all that bad. Not as good as the iPhone but not bad. It's Android that is crippling the samsung phones. Android is just all bad.
It's perfectly valid to use your own preference as a point of reference. That's not narcissistic. But your comment was just plain rude. "I don't know why you have to be so rude"--right back attcha.
Personally, I find it more amazing that some people don't know that Google is their friend....
From Wikipedia:
"Microsoft Windows has supported DPI aware programs since Windows Vista[4] and allows user specified DPI settings for the windowing interface.[5]
The Windows Presentation Foundation from Microsoft, and consequently, WPF applications, are also designed to be resolution-independent."
Do you also yell at kids to get off your lawn, and say "bah humbug" a lot?
If they offer you what you want, AND also other people what they want, why be so negative. Other people do like things that you do not.
Consumer Choice =/=
Why is it that everyone else can have several different size phones but whenever there is talk of apple doing that, everyone starts screaming about fragmentation and the woes of the developers? Is iOS really that much harder to write for as far as supporting multiple screen sizes? Not trying to be a smarta$$, I really don't understand.
Consumers want good products. Better have fewer good products and not more worse ones. And that was Jobs mantra in 1997 when he took over Apple again. But Cook didn't copy this (Jobs did say do what Cook would do).
I see where you are coming from. And in a way I agree with you. But I just really don't want the too many SKU's of the 90's to return to Apple. I might harp on it a little too much but I remember those days even though I was much younger then. Apple learnt many lessons from that era. I hope Apple never forget them.
I dont really believe this to be what they're planning. Maybe testing.
its too diversified for Apple. In fact, I can't believe they will suddenly diversify this way.
However, if they do, I might seriously consider an iphone. I dont like 4" screens. I feel like they're too small. I put some serious lookin into the iphone5 when i decided to dump BBRY, but the 4" size limitation was just too hard to overcome.
4.7" device seems like it's the one to shoot for. I dont think Apple needs a phablet. thats too "geek". But a 4.7" would make a lot of sense, and seems to be a "sweet spot" that lots of people in the phone market are looking for right now.
its too diversified for Apple. In fact, I can't believe they will suddenly diversify this way.
However, if they do, I might seriously consider an iphone. I dont like 4" screens. I feel like they're too small. I put some serious lookin into the iphone5 when i decided to dump BBRY, but the 4" size limitation was just too hard to overcome.
4.7" device seems like it's the one to shoot for. I dont think Apple needs a phablet. thats too "geek". But a 4.7" would make a lot of sense, and seems to be a "sweet spot" that lots of people in the phone market are looking for right now.
My iPhone is above all a mobile phone, and so portability is important. The size of the device is more important than the size of the screen, so I have no problem with the screen staying the same size. But if they can make the screen bigger, mostly by eating into the facia and not make too big a difference to the width, then I would be ecstatic.
But if they do make it bigger, the figures given don't quite add up. 1080p at 4.7" wouldn't be far out of line with what is available, and much more believable.
But if they do make it bigger, the figures given don't quite add up. 1080p at 4.7" wouldn't be far out of line with what is available, and much more believable.
So they would go from 11.6" to 12" screen on the MBA? That would be interesting if they followed that pattern through to their other models so that we could end up with 12" & 14" MBA's and 14" & 16" MBP's. I guess that would make sense if they've no intention of bringing back the 17" MBP.
I just hope 2014 will be a whole lot more exciting that 2013 which has been possibly the most boring year I can remember as an Apple fan.
I just hope 2014 will be a whole lot more exciting that 2013 which has been possibly the most boring year I can remember as an Apple fan.
Yes, iOS does NOT have resolution independence, while Android does (since v.1.6).
Which means that if Apple changes the resolution other than exactly doubling, etc. the number of pixels, iOS developers will have to rewrite their apps (which Android developers do not have to do).
"...Apple, once again, intends to count on display technology for new product innovation."
Sounds pretty boring to me. Displays are a commodity...they are everywhere in a multitude of formats and physical characteristics. Apple needs to bring more to the table besides better screen resolution and .0001 inch thinner displays to be called "innovative". The iPad seems to be on the same iPhone track: every year bump the CPU a bit, swap a color, and add the latest iOS and POOF! that's innovative! Meh. I don't demand mind blowing changes every year but the iPad and iPhones have really just fallen into the same old personal computer cycle we've seen for the last 30 years...except that Apple never drops the price.
There's nothing necessarily wrong about the iPad...but I think a larger unit (which is bigger display, bigger battery, bigger virtual keyboard, etc.) would be quite nice. Most of the "features" people want are software...which may rely on the power of the CPU/GPU and other specs. But then there's the total lack of hardware which just is insane...no USB port for a boatload of uses, no SD or similar port for adding your own storage or offloading all your pix from your camera...no stereo speakers...camera is fair/poor compared to how much real estate they have to include better/bigger lens, flash, whatever.
I am really dying for a 12"+ iPad...the current iPads are just not big enough for the amount of email, web browsing, and PDF viewing I do.
Sounds pretty boring to me. Displays are a commodity...they are everywhere in a multitude of formats and physical characteristics. Apple needs to bring more to the table besides better screen resolution and .0001 inch thinner displays to be called "innovative". The iPad seems to be on the same iPhone track: every year bump the CPU a bit, swap a color, and add the latest iOS and POOF! that's innovative! Meh. I don't demand mind blowing changes every year but the iPad and iPhones have really just fallen into the same old personal computer cycle we've seen for the last 30 years...except that Apple never drops the price.
There's nothing necessarily wrong about the iPad...but I think a larger unit (which is bigger display, bigger battery, bigger virtual keyboard, etc.) would be quite nice. Most of the "features" people want are software...which may rely on the power of the CPU/GPU and other specs. But then there's the total lack of hardware which just is insane...no USB port for a boatload of uses, no SD or similar port for adding your own storage or offloading all your pix from your camera...no stereo speakers...camera is fair/poor compared to how much real estate they have to include better/bigger lens, flash, whatever.
I am really dying for a 12"+ iPad...the current iPads are just not big enough for the amount of email, web browsing, and PDF viewing I do.
Put me down for the iPhone 6 and an Apple 4K TV.
But where are the external displays in this rumor? I'm looking for an updated 27" monitor.
But where are the external displays in this rumor? I'm looking for an updated 27" monitor.
Last edited:
Agreed but a 5.7" iPod touch would be rather nice. More pocket friendly than the iPad and perfect for mobile gaming.
iOS is that much easier to develop for than Android. Limited different screen sizes is a part of that equation.
iOS is like trying to make a plug to fit in American domestic sockets. Android is trying to fit plugs to all domestic, industrial, portable and proprietary sockets worldwide.
"...Apple, once again, intends to count on display technology for new product innovation."
Sounds pretty boring to me. Displays are a commodity...they are everywhere in a multitude of formats and physical characteristics. Apple needs to bring more to the table besides better screen resolution and .0001 inch thinner displays to be called "innovative". The iPad seems to be on the same iPhone track: every year bump the CPU a bit, swap a color, and add the latest iOS and POOF! that's innovative! Meh. I don't demand mind blowing changes every year but the iPad and iPhones have really just fallen into the same old personal computer cycle we've seen for the last 30 years...except that Apple never drops the price.
There's nothing necessarily wrong about the iPad...but I think a larger unit (which is bigger display, bigger battery, bigger virtual keyboard, etc.) would be quite nice. Most of the "features" people want are software...which may rely on the power of the CPU/GPU and other specs. But then there's the total lack of hardware which just is insane...no USB port for a boatload of uses, no SD or similar port for adding your own storage or offloading all your pix from your camera...no stereo speakers...camera is fair/poor compared to how much real estate they have to include better/bigger lens, flash, whatever.
I am really dying for a 12"+ iPad...the current iPads are just not big enough for the amount of email, web browsing, and PDF viewing I do.
While we're at the ever increasing size... why not just jump to the 50" tablets.
Faux news already has them!
Not keeping the current size available isn't my idea of choice. I thought the 3.5 size was fine
Not everyone wants a ginormous phone, and most that do seem to frequent these forums.