I hope apple keeps he same aspect ration. The tall narrowing one is going to make regular landscape tasks bad. You will have reduced visible content, and unless apple changes their keyboard it will cover a greater percentage of of the screen.
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.
The resolution of the new iPhone
- Thread starter QuiteSharp
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
True, as far as we know, and maybe that is the problem Apple has had all along. The highest resolution I have heard of is the 440ppi from LG, and maybe Apple will use this or something similar...or maybe they have something else in the works that we just don't know about.
If they stay with the retina display or go with a 440ppi screen, they will have to adjust the scaling on the software for this phone. That will be complicated and lead to some fragmentation. They ony way they can avoid that is by using a screen with sufficient pixel density to double the resolution.
As was posted earlier, the 1.5x would probably work without a lot of problems, but to me that seems like a ground-rule double when they want a home run.
----------
Agree 100%!
If they stay with the retina display or go with a 440ppi screen, they will have to adjust the scaling on the software for this phone. That will be complicated and lead to some fragmentation. They ony way they can avoid that is by using a screen with sufficient pixel density to double the resolution.
As was posted earlier, the 1.5x would probably work without a lot of problems, but to me that seems like a ground-rule double when they want a home run.
----------
Agree 100%!
I suppose it is completely possible that Apple could follow their recent tactic of doubling the resolution and scaling accordingly.
iPad2 1024 x 768
iPad3 2048 x 1536
MacBook Pro 15-inch 1440 × 900
MacBook Pro 15-inch Retina display 2880x1800
iPhone 4/4S 960 x 640
iPhone 5 1920 x 1280????
We can only hope...
iPad2 1024 x 768
iPad3 2048 x 1536
MacBook Pro 15-inch 1440 × 900
MacBook Pro 15-inch Retina display 2880x1800
iPhone 4/4S 960 x 640
iPhone 5 1920 x 1280????
We can only hope...
I brought this exact topic up over at Imore forum only to be shot down by posters saying I was high based on the fact that the iPhones ppi was already so high that it couldn't be improved. My reasoning at the time and still is is very simple why go through the trouble of increasing the screen size and changing the ration to 16.9 and only bump the ppi a little to handle it. iOS 6 already has been built using auto layout, first hint that a drastic change is coming. Second doubling the resolution to 1920 * 1280 is virtually easy at this point in the game and with the amount of development time they have had to work on it with their suppliers. Third if your going to go 16*9 why not give the dang phone full 1080p resolution why your at it, movies can play at their native resolution basically everything is released in 1080p anyway isn't all the new movies on iTunes released in a 1080p format now, Apple tv supports 1080p, any tv that can support AirPlay will have at least a 720p resolution and so forth.
Some posters said blatantly that this wouldn't happen because Apple didn't need to increase their resolution. 1 Apple does know what their competitors are doing regardless of what they say. And as a company why wouldn't they want the absolute best for their customers if there was ever a terrific selling point to go along with that new bigger screen it would be The new IPhone with the highest resolution screen ever offered by anyone anywhere on a phone. Remember Apples marketing is legendary and with a new design and all the new features they will once again send the competition back to the drawing board.
Some posters said blatantly that this wouldn't happen because Apple didn't need to increase their resolution. 1 Apple does know what their competitors are doing regardless of what they say. And as a company why wouldn't they want the absolute best for their customers if there was ever a terrific selling point to go along with that new bigger screen it would be The new IPhone with the highest resolution screen ever offered by anyone anywhere on a phone. Remember Apples marketing is legendary and with a new design and all the new features they will once again send the competition back to the drawing board.
1920x1080 full HD screens ... why?
Were talking about pocket devices with screens in the 4" - 5" range.
The home run would be when resolution could be considered as 2x 720x480, and no more 3x 480x320 for compatibility/transition with the older models
yesssir we are and I would have thought someone was flat out insane of they told me 2 years ago that folks would walk around with 720p resolution screens on their phones but hear we are.
A 1920x1080 4" screen would then have a pixel density of 550 ppi.
Screens with such a pixel density already exists, and even if Apple were able to get them mass produced and cheap enough, i don't see them targetting this usage for this kind of device.
Seriously, who cares to display on a 4" screen a full HD video?
No human being could see the benefit to jump to this resolution to such small screens.
And how would iOS deal with this resolution (2x vertically, but not in width) to render actual apps?
I already find my 440 ppi mockup almost crazy, but 1920x1080 sure won't happen. This would be just pointless.
I agree with you 100% that that kind of quality on a phone is pointless. However, it would be a huge selling point because a lot of people simply don't understand that. It's the same thing with megapixels- the average joe just assumes the higher the number the "better" the camera and that is far from true. I don't think Apple will do this just yet, but between them and Samsung it is coming either way. There are millions of consumers out there who have more money than brains.
An important distinction is that I was suggesting 1920x1280, not 1920x1080. I think it will stay 3:2, and this would be double resolution in length and width so scaling is a non-issue.
I agree also that it would be overkill in today's market, but it would be a big selling point that they can display native 1080p, which would tie-in with their offerings on iTunes, and guarantee they would be competitive for the 2 yr cycle of the phone, if not more. As b166er said, someone is going to do it first. The technology will be available and they will use it. Does 4k video give you a noticeably improved picture on a tv in your living room? Do we need 600hp cars when the speed limit is 45 on most streets?
I also don't think they are constrained to a 4" diagonal screen, although admittedly they don't want to make it too big. They will have to increase the screen length and width by at least 1/2" in order to add another row and column of icons, or there will be a lot of dead space around the ones in the current 4x5 icon setup. That would mean a minimum of 2.45x3.45, but keeping with the 3:2 ratio, the 2.45x3.68 (4.42" diagonal) that I mentioned earlier works. They could do this with the 440ppi screen and it would give a resolution of 1620x1080 that could display video in 720p. Again, though, with this size scaling is a problem...which leads me back to believing that 1920x1280 is their goal if they can do it.
I agree also that it would be overkill in today's market, but it would be a big selling point that they can display native 1080p, which would tie-in with their offerings on iTunes, and guarantee they would be competitive for the 2 yr cycle of the phone, if not more. As b166er said, someone is going to do it first. The technology will be available and they will use it. Does 4k video give you a noticeably improved picture on a tv in your living room? Do we need 600hp cars when the speed limit is 45 on most streets?
I also don't think they are constrained to a 4" diagonal screen, although admittedly they don't want to make it too big. They will have to increase the screen length and width by at least 1/2" in order to add another row and column of icons, or there will be a lot of dead space around the ones in the current 4x5 icon setup. That would mean a minimum of 2.45x3.45, but keeping with the 3:2 ratio, the 2.45x3.68 (4.42" diagonal) that I mentioned earlier works. They could do this with the 440ppi screen and it would give a resolution of 1620x1080 that could display video in 720p. Again, though, with this size scaling is a problem...which leads me back to believing that 1920x1280 is their goal if they can do it.
That's not usually the way Apple work, though.
When they jumped to 326 ppi on the iPhone 4, it was for good reasons (doubling resolution, ease of transition for devs, etc.), not simply because the technology were available or to be the first consumer device with such a high pixel density.
Does it brings value to the user experience is better question.
Do you really believe that's a target for Apple, adding one more row or column of icon?
That would help having less pages of apps to pass through, but would it be easier to search visually in even more icons per pages? Spotlight or Siri might be more efficient anyway for launching apps. Or they can re-think the whole thing, i don't know. Anyway, you spend more time actually in apps than dealing with icons in a grid
Last edited:
that's exactly my thinking the current resolution has been around for 2 years now and most of the legit smartphone competitors have bettered Apple in terms of resolution not ppi but definitely resolution. If we look at Apples current trends and the retina madness they have going on right now this all seems like the perfect time to future proof the next generation iPhone
Now think about this for a minute this will be the first iPhone with a new screen for at least the next couple years we will be here. So if I were going to change screens and the iPhone and iPad use such similar processors and I could from a companies perspective keep cost in line then I would want to be the first to get there, especially now that all my competitors have shown their cards for the year. In this world people like sexy products and if there's one thing Apple knows well is the sexier and more premium you make a product the more it will sell itself
Now think about this for a minute this will be the first iPhone with a new screen for at least the next couple years we will be here. So if I were going to change screens and the iPhone and iPad use such similar processors and I could from a companies perspective keep cost in line then I would want to be the first to get there, especially now that all my competitors have shown their cards for the year. In this world people like sexy products and if there's one thing Apple knows well is the sexier and more premium you make a product the more it will sell itself
Apple likes things to be neat and polished. They have made it clear that they don't like the fragmentation, so whatever they can do to minizime that would be the top choice. The easiest and smoothest solution, IMO, is to increase in multiples that can be easily scaled. Don't get me wrong, I like your proposal...I think that is the minimum option for them, but I think the 1.5x scaling is going to be a compromise they don't want to make unless they have to.
Actually yes, and it goes back to the polished, finished look. They are all about neatness in the layout..that's why you can't put the icons wherever you want. It's one thing to have a little bit of dead space, it's another to have too much. I see two options, one where they make only a slight increase in screen size, where there is not enough dead space to be noticeable (less likely, IMO), and one where they stretch to make sure they continue the regimented layout and fit in a fifth column to keep proper spacing.
If the screen is only taller, then I certainly won't be upgrading. The biggest problem with the current screen is the dismal keyboard in portrait mode, where the letters are too densely packed to be able to type usefully. Switching to landscape not only SHOULDNT be a requirement, but you still run into the problem of very little content being display because, AGAIN, the width of the screen is too narrow.
Either they increase the width, or the iphone 5 will be a failure. It's worth fragmenting the resolutions for.
Either they increase the width, or the iphone 5 will be a failure. It's worth fragmenting the resolutions for.
1920x1280?! Its an impossible resolution for the new iPhone assuming it has the display size ranging from 3.5-4.3 inches (rumored), unless Apple has somehow decided to adopt nanotechnology...
----------
I was just thinking... perhaps that extra space for a fifth row of icons could be used for a widget? Take the weather widget from the NC and put it on the extra row. It all makes sense now!
Step 0 - 1.5x of every actual retina apps
Step 1 - devs update their apps, supplying the 3x version of any bitmap, apps are now rendered at 3x 480x320, just as it is at 2x now on the iPhone 4/4S ; the screen while bigger doesn't offer more space for datas, it's only an expansion (while games for instance, as on the rMBP, can access the full resolution). And one can imagine iOS doing some work to adapt apps to add really more space (adapt keyboard with no vertical expansion, status bar physically the same height, and stuffs like that).
Step 2 - during the next -say- 2 years, once 3GS are completely obsoleted, and most handset sold/replaced are now with the new resolution, iOS operate a transition to the resolution 2x 720x480
I agree that it is an option and it can be made to work. And it may very well be the way they go...my thoughts are pure speculation. My only reason to think they won't go that route is the fact that they made such a big deal about the retina display and image clarity on the 4/4S that I think they'd be hesitant to take a step back or a perceived step back. Like you said, going to the 440ppi screen means it's unlikely to be noticeable, but to me this seems like a compromise. Apple has been known to make baby steps, so it's certainly very possible. But given the fact that this phone will be in play for 2 yrs or more, I'd stil think they would want to reach a bit in order to prevent becoming "obsolete" next month.
yep and so are mine, of course
Only compromise on visual aspect would be on not updated bitmap elements (as used for buttons in apps, etc.), everything else (text content, photos, videos) could take advantage of the screen, exactly just as when the iPhone 4 was launched, or the mMBP more recently.
plus with the increase in resolution all of Apples current products will have displays in full 1080p resolution that in itself means no matter which device you view iTunes content on it will be in its native resolution which is inherently a staple in how Apple does things no compromises in any of it's products, and that my friends is the way a company can dominate the completion.
Raise the bar do unnaturally high that no matter what the competition does they are playing catch up while Apple will seem like they are dictating
Raise the bar do unnaturally high that no matter what the competition does they are playing catch up while Apple will seem like they are dictating
Also and this is pure speculation this helps with development of future Apple products and drives down the cost of components in the future. New products can improve in function only but the native resolution will be at current and the foreseeable futures peak. This way the only thing that can be improved is the speed of the device. The cost savings will occur with time although initial development cost would be high in less than a year the prices will naturally lower due to improved assembly times and also the cost to produce the screens will drop as well a win win for now and the future.
And I know there isnt a good reason for a 1080p screen on a mobile device but 3 years ago I would have said the same thing now I say how did we live without these things
And I know there isnt a good reason for a 1080p screen on a mobile device but 3 years ago I would have said the same thing now I say how did we live without these things
yes but all the IOS devices if the iPod touch follows this also will be retina resolution