Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

bniu

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Mar 21, 2010
1,128
314
So the iPhone 6 Plus has to render everything at 2208x1242 before downscaling to 1920x1080. Seems like a waste of computing resources. Why didn't Apple just have it render a 1920x1080 image and not have to bother with the downscaling? 1920x1080 @3x would result in 640x360 points, which would be close enough to the iPhone 6's point resolution of 667x375 points. So why would Apple force the iPhone 6 Plus to render more pixels than it can display?
 
tldr: It's easier for developers

- - - -

You should read John Gruber's prediction article where he guesses that the iPhone 6 will have an actual 2208x1242 screen:

http://daringfireball.net/2014/08/larger_iphone_display_conjecture

That was obviously wrong but you'll still learn from it. The fact that he guessed the 2208 resolution before we knew what the hardware would be speaks loudly to the logic of such a number.

Then read his actual phone review that talks about the iPhone 6 as it was released:

http://daringfireball.net/2014/09/the_iphones_6


Between the two you'll probably get the picture.
 
So the iPhone 6 Plus has to render everything at 2208x1242 before downscaling to 1920x1080. Seems like a waste of computing resources. Why didn't Apple just have it render a 1920x1080 image and not have to bother with the downscaling? 1920x1080 @3x would result in 640x360 points, which would be close enough to the iPhone 6's point resolution of 667x375 points. So why would Apple force the iPhone 6 Plus to render more pixels than it can display?

Close enough is not good enough, needs to be perfect. I am sure out of the millions of dollars they dump into R and D, someone tested all the rendering methods and found that the way they are doing it currently results in the best image quality. The A8 can handle it just fine anyways, not sure what the big deal is.
 
So the iPhone 6 Plus has to render everything at 2208x1242 before downscaling to 1920x1080. Seems like a waste of computing resources. Why didn't Apple just have it render a 1920x1080 image and not have to bother with the downscaling? 1920x1080 @3x would result in 640x360 points, which would be close enough to the iPhone 6's point resolution of 667x375 points. So why would Apple force the iPhone 6 Plus to render more pixels than it can display?
This has to do with the original panels that Apple planed for the iPhone six and 6+which were well above 1080 P resolution for both. imore.com explained it in one of their podcasts.
 
Some future iPhone (7+ perhaps?) will have a screen with 2208x1242. And the developers who had already optimized their apps for the 6+ screen will have to do nothing. The apps will just work and look better and everyone will be happy and there will be peace on Earth and all that good stuff.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.