Hence the wording in the article that it was *almost* exactly the same ratio, and also the pointed out 16:9.01 aspect ratio in the math to which you just responded.
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.
Video Demo of What a 4" iPhone Screen Looks Like in Action
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Hence the wording in the article that it was *almost* exactly the same ratio, and also the pointed out 16:9.01 aspect ratio in the math to which you just responded.
He sounds more like Yoda
Unless on Apple's board of directors you sit, then nothing you know!
...
Would this also hold true to maybe Apple getting the reception stuff up again being resurfaced ?
You are holding it wrong.
No, really, hold it sideways and you have it quite wide.
Would this also hold true to maybe Apple getting the reception stuff up again being resurfaced ?
Because the iPhone has 640 pixels. If you don't downscale, the other option is to crop the edges of your HD content.
you're confusing two seperate things
SHAPE: measured in aspect ratio. how long to how tall the display is. This is NOT dependant on pixel count.
For example: 16:9 is the modern "widescreen" standard that most, high definition monitors are sold as. however resolution wise, this can be anything from the rumoured iphone 5's 1136x640 resolution, or the more common standards of 1280x720 or 1920x1080, or the newest fanciest 4k's at 3840x2160.
All these, despite being vastly different resolutions are all still 16:9. displayin a 16:9 image on all these screens would yield zero distortion of the image to fit into the shape.
Apple is using 1136x640 to hit the 16:9 screen shape. they've decided instead of upping the ersolution of the display to 1280x720 for this shape, they would keep the 640pixel height and ad a few hundred pixels to the width. The shape is identical to 1280x720 so no stretching or image shape changes need to occur in regards to height, which means no need to change the scaling on fonts and other UI elements. Yet, 16:9 imagees will display in their native shape, but with reduced resolution.
----------
This is one reason why Steve jobs was adamant against multiple different iphones with different screens and different sized ipads with different resolutions.
Steve wanted 1 App design to be consistent accross the entirety of the Apple product line
Except that's not correct. There are already two aspect ratios on Apple devices. iPad and iPhone. True, this would introduce a 3rd, but it's not like they were sticking to a single aspect ratio before.
----------
Developers already need to create everything in 2 aspect ratios.
The iPad aspect ratio is not the same as the iPhone 4S aspect ratio.
arn
Keeping in mind MobileMe was an updated version of .mac, which was an updated version of iTools. Saying that MobileMe was a failure is like saying they put 11 years of hard work for nothing… which isn't true.
Now Ping is a failure!
I'm sure we'll get a 2272x1280 (1136x640 doubled) screen in a few years.
arn
Do you stare at your phone 1 inch apart? It's already crisp in a distance that a person would naturally use it. and if it's only the print thing you're talking about that will benefit at it, it's unnecessary.
The 10th generation iPhone with 4x pixels than retina display.
You will not see any pixels even you stare at it like a microscope.
Last edited:
Once again, you're missing the point. The industry has been gradually increasing pixel density for the past 20 years. This is not a new concept. I never said it was. Apple pioneered true print quality on an LCD display. Debate it however you want, but the fact is Apple took that leap and got there first. You're misunderstanding me as claiming Apple started the resolution-increase trend. They did not, this has been going on for decades. They took the huge leap to get a display at PRINT quality.
It's debatable whether or not others would have had that same ambition for a print quality display. They would have surely continued to increase resolution, but I'm not sure they would have tried to go the entire distance. If you look at the trend over the last decade, it's been very slow and very subtle. Then Apple came along and said "forget minor increases, let's just go all the way."
You can't compare the Droid display to the iPads. Completely different sizes, held at different viewing distances. When I looked at a Droid display in 2009, I kinda went "yea it looks a little better, no big deal." When I saw the retina display I said "wow."
Ugh! Stop this insanity! Consumer electronics products, especially Apple products, are in the pipeline for years before they are ready for release. Anybody who thinks Steve Jobs was not overseeing every one of the Apple products being released this year, and next, and probably many of the the major products to be released the year after that, are seriously delusional.
I think there's more to the taller screen than just an extra row for apps and larger folders.
Apple rarely does anything "just because." Case in point:
1) Why did they start selling bumpers with the launch of the iPhone 4? That was a very odd move and not a very "Apple-like" decision. I think it was because they were aware of the antenna issues at the time of launch and came up with the "bumper solution" until they could find a way to address the issue.
2) Why did they remove the time-remaining notification on Mountain Lion? Likely because they were aware of battery issues and wanted to mask it as much as possible (a percentage is much more difficult to quantify than a time) until they could push out a fix.
Their software and hardware design decisions are always deliberate and serve a purpose. That's why I have a sneaking suspicion that there will be some new OS feature that will make use of the extra height that has yet to be revealed (maybe a new implementation of notifications or something).
Anyway, that's just my theory on the whole taller screen issue.
Apple rarely does anything "just because." Case in point:
1) Why did they start selling bumpers with the launch of the iPhone 4? That was a very odd move and not a very "Apple-like" decision. I think it was because they were aware of the antenna issues at the time of launch and came up with the "bumper solution" until they could find a way to address the issue.
2) Why did they remove the time-remaining notification on Mountain Lion? Likely because they were aware of battery issues and wanted to mask it as much as possible (a percentage is much more difficult to quantify than a time) until they could push out a fix.
Their software and hardware design decisions are always deliberate and serve a purpose. That's why I have a sneaking suspicion that there will be some new OS feature that will make use of the extra height that has yet to be revealed (maybe a new implementation of notifications or something).
Anyway, that's just my theory on the whole taller screen issue.
Bumpers weren't sold with the launch of the iphone4. they were only made available and then distributed AFTER apple was caught dead to rights with a serious design flaw that hit the media with people demanding a solution.
Apple first tried to hide claims that there was an antenna problem, And then tried to pass it off as "normal". Even so far as to accusing pretty much every other company of having antenna issues.
Only after people had enough did apple finally go "oh ok, oops, here's a free bumper to fix the problem"
Apple is one of the worst companies at admitting when they goof. The Apple mentality is that their own farts smell like roses.
and we all know, nobodies farts smell like roses.
Going to have to verify this. But i'm pretty sure this feature still exists in ML. will check when i get home.
Our difference here I think is that I don't think the jump from Droid's screen to iPhone 4s screen was "wow" material. I was wowed when the Droid screen came out and when the iphone 4 came out I was "ah, it's even better, cool!". It seemed more of an incremental step for me. I think that's our basic difference and what makes us miss each others' point
And the trend towards higher dpi is not as universal as you think, we have been stuck to low dpi for quite a while on desktop/laptops. I had a 19" inch 1600x1200 monitor 12 years ago, and 4 years ago I bought a 1920x1200 24" inch monitor. After 8 years, I bought something that had lower dpi than what I had. (both mid-range consumer products, one was a Hitachi CRT and the other a 24" LG LCD). We were stuck with the same pixel densities for almost a decade. And that's why when the RMBP was released, I did a little dance. And I think Apple will finally start things going again. And here is where I think Apple deserves a lot of credit.
I disagree... going from the iPhone 4 to the iPhone 4S was a letdown.
This next iPhone actually makes some noticeable changes on the surface... and who knows what else it will have.
Seriously?
this is pointless. why would anyone want to look at your mockup of the performance of a mockup of a rumored design? it's ridiculous. we'll all see the real thing soon enough. stop wasting our time.
this is pointless. why would anyone want to look at your mockup of the performance of a mockup of a rumored design? it's ridiculous. we'll all see the real thing soon enough. stop wasting our time.
Yes they were. There are postings on this forum of people wondering if the bumper would be available at the same time as the iPhone 4 release.
----------
The only one wasting your time is you. Nobody made you read this article or watch the video. Many of us appreciated it.
Sorry
Technically you are correct
The "bumbers" were available at launch. And at the time were deemed an accessory and a protector case.
It was not known at launch that there would be the antenna issue and that the bumpers were a fix.
Bumpers themselves were not provided for free with purchase of iphone until after threatened with lawsuits and negative press by conusmers reports.
July 16th was already a month after release of the iphone 4. meaning Apple refused to aknowledge or deal directly with a known hardware issue for a month before offering up a free "fix"
though technically you were correct. you could buy a bumper on launch day AFAIK
Irony just shot itself through the roof of its mouth. It's dead. No more irony. No more. All gone.
I think the idea (or conspiracy theory?) is that Apple knew about the issue and produced the bumpers in advance to thwart the issue. Perhaps they were thinking if they talked enough people into buying bumpers the antenna issue wouldn't rear it's ugly head?
Again, not saying I believe that, but I think this is the point that was being made. Apple always has a purpose/intention behind change and that there is some bigger purpose or intention behind the screen size increase.
I'd like to hope there's something cool planned for it, like widgets or live tiles, instead of just making it bigger to go 16:9 for video consumption. :-/ But I'm willing to bet that's how Apple will sell it.
Last edited: