Indeed, so another question: what's the point of a 16:9 screen on a phone? What purpose does it serve?
Already explained. It offers the potential for extra screen realestate that would not be possible with 4:3 unless you make the overall phone size more unwieldy.
Already explained. It offers the potential for extra screen realestate that would not be possible with 4:3 unless you make the overall phone size more unwieldy.
Apple and I seem to think that's the wrong real estate.
An unverified report claims Apple has begun placing orders for a 4.6-inch Retina Display bound for the next-generation iPhone that could launch as early as "around the second quarter."
Please no. I want a phone that fits my pocket and that I can use with a single hand. I have no use for an ironing board.
It's completely ridiculous to think that this could be for the next iPhone.
A 4.6" screen with the iPhone's aspect ratio would be difficult to even hold.
This is achievable in the current form factor by eliminating/squeezing the home button and moving camera/speaker to the edge.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Firefly7475
Apple would need to change the aspect ratio which would change the UI which is something Apple simply can't do.
They can execute it with ease and no pain for developers and users. All existing apps just run in the same resolution. Top/bottom screen areas may stay off or get used by OS notifications, multi-task controls etc.
The new apps that wish to utilize full screen (like browser, video players) just use new APIs to access the full wide display.
Is is quite likely that Apple will try to standardize the current screen size madness of 4 sizes (orig. iPhone, iPhone doubled, orig. iPad, iPad doubled) down to just two: orig. iPad, iPad doubled.
In that sense I kind of expect the next iPhone to use a 768x1024 resolution.
This might still qualify as Retina display on a 4.6" size.
and even when increasing the screen size the actual iPhone might not be that much larger if Apple manages to reduce top and bottom sizes.
Remove the bottom button, replaced with a 4 or 5 finger gesture. Or make the button slim or put it on the side of the device.
Is is quite likely that Apple will try to standardize the current screen size madness of 4 sizes (orig. iPhone, iPhone doubled, orig. iPad, iPad doubled) down to just two: orig. iPad, iPad doubled.
In that sense I kind of expect the next iPhone to use a 768x1024 resolution.
This might still qualify as Retina display on a 4.6" size.
and even when increasing the screen size the actual iPhone might not be that much larger if Apple manages to reduce top and bottom sizes.
Remove the bottom button, replaced with a 4 or 5 finger gesture. Or make the button slim or put it on the side of the device.
1) 1024x768 is a 4:3 aspect ratio making it very, very wide and unwieldy for a phone. It would have to be smaller than the iPhone on the diagonal to be as wide.
2) 4.6" 1024x768 is 278 PPI, a little more than the iPad 3.
3) Reduing the top and bottom casing doesn't resolve the issue of width. IOW, how wide the device I on the short side. If Apple wants to maintain the same usability and not alter the aspect ratio then 4" would about the limit but that would require reducing the size bezel and/or making it thinner to retain the thumb sweep. For 4.6" to be feasible I would have to be a very widescreen display.
Is is quite likely that Apple will try to standardize the current screen size madness of 4 sizes (orig. iPhone, iPhone doubled, orig. iPad, iPad doubled) down to just two: orig. iPad, iPad doubled.
In that sense I kind of expect the next iPhone to use a 768x1024 resolution.
Why would they go from 3:2 to 4:3 on the next iPhone?
Quote:
Remove the bottom button, replaced with a 4 or 5 finger gesture.
We always need a hardware out.
Quote:
Or make the button slim or put it on the side of the device.
On the Android devices I've tried, that shuts the thing off prematurely for me.
For 4.6" to be feasible I would have to be a very widescreen display.
Calculations show that by making display edge-to-edge wide (2 1/4 inches instead of just 2) and round-corner-to-round-corner long (4 inches instead of 3), the diagonal would be
square root of (4^2 + 2.25^2) = 4.58938994 which is in line with the rumor
Without making screen width edge-to-edge the maximum for the current form factor is
Nice excuse. So what makes it so difficult to put that damn home button on the edge of the device along with power and volume buttons?
They could do that and I quite like that idea but does it sound like a solution that Apple would incorporate?
If we're thinking of alternative ways to include a Home Button how about building it into the bottom 1/6th of the display much like the trackpads work?
Your sarcasm is a waste of our time. And my point still stands: Apple should diversify its iPhone offerings JUST LIKE IT DID WITH THE IPOD LINE. That strategy was a success.
As everyone knows, the hardware button sucks. Double-clicks work 50% of the time AT BEST.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
And then maybe they should make all their products out of black plastic and race everyone else to the bottom!
We always need a hardware out. Who in the world would want a touch Home Button when the gestures are so much better for non-tactile work?
Apple should diversify its iPhone offerings JUST LIKE IT DID WITH THE IPOD LINE. That strategy was a success.
You're not understanding the difference between the iPod running a Linux-based OS and having no App Store and iOS-based iDevices. YOU CAN'T SWITCH DISPLAY SIZES, RESOLUTIONS, AND ASPECT RATIOS YEAR-OVER-YEAR LIKE THEY DID WITH THE iPOD NANO.
Quote:
As everyone knows, the hardware button sucks. Double-clicks work 50% of the time AT BEST.
Being a physical button it's possible for the HW to be defective but I have no knowledge of double-clicking only working 50% of the time on iPod Touches, iPhones and iPads. Do you have documentation to back up this claim?
TS is right, you need the HW out. This not negotiable at this time. There is a reason these devices have HW buttons. It certainly wasn't because they couldn't figure out how to make them SW-based.
Apple should diversify its iPhone offerings JUST LIKE IT DID WITH THE IPOD LINE. That strategy was a success.
So a dumbphone for people who don't want apps, the mythical 2"-screened iPhone nano, a regular iPhone, and then a 5" phone for basketball players.
It was a success, sure, but the iPod touch is virtually redundant now and the iPod classic is dead. Matching that current situation up with a projection, that'd mean the real iPhone would be killed off in favor of just the 5" one and the dumbphone, and people don't really want dumbphones, so that'd be killed off…
So just the 2" and 5" models, then?
Quote:
As everyone knows, the hardware button sucks.
It has always worked beautifully for me on all of my iDevices.
Quote:
Double-clicks work 50% of the time AT BEST.
100% for me. But I suppose some hyperbole is in order.
Look, I absolutely love the gestures. I use them exclusively to get around… except when they don't work because an app is hanging. Then I simply tap the Home Button a single time and it immediately takes me where I want to go. It's comfort. It wouldn't feel right buying a device without that protection.
Macs still have physical power buttons. Because occasionally we have to hold them down for ten seconds and start anew. What happens when your computer's stuck and you go to press that software power button you so thoroughly campaigned for only to find that it's doing diddly-squat?
Yanking power cables is for Hollywood movies as a last resort when hackers are getting your data.
Comments
Indeed, so another question: what's the point of a 16:9 screen on a phone? What purpose does it serve?
Already explained. It offers the potential for extra screen realestate that would not be possible with 4:3 unless you make the overall phone size more unwieldy.
Already explained. It offers the potential for extra screen realestate that would not be possible with 4:3 unless you make the overall phone size more unwieldy.
Apple and I seem to think that's the wrong real estate.
Apple and I seem to think that's the wrong real estate.
Well I would say extra realestate is better than no extra realestate.
Really what Apple should do is give the consumer more choice with different screen sizes and colors.
And please get rid of that damn hardware button and replace it with a touch version.
Well I would say extra realestate is better than no extra realestate.
And that would be the case if we were talking about the iPhone shuffle. Since there's no product that will ever exist like that…
Really what Apple should do is give the consumer more choice with different screen sizes and colors.
And then maybe they should make all their products out of black plastic and race everyone else to the bottom!
And please get rid of that damn hardware button and replace it with a touch version.
We always need a hardware out. Who in the world would want a touch Home Button when the gestures are so much better for non-tactile work?
Too big. My iPhone barley fits in my pocket as is. I hope not.
Barely fits?
You do realize the iPhone (and all other phones) are not meant to fit into that little coin pocket in the right, front pocket?
An unverified report claims Apple has begun placing orders for a 4.6-inch Retina Display bound for the next-generation iPhone that could launch as early as "around the second quarter."
Please no. I want a phone that fits my pocket and that I can use with a single hand. I have no use for an ironing board.
It's more likely that Adriana Lima and Alessandra Ambrosio will drop by for a night of sex with me than it is that this rumor is true.
And Adriana is married, a mother of two, and highly religious. And Alessandra is presently about four months pregnant.
So, do the math.
Okay.
I think the math is; AL + AA + s = me +
It's completely ridiculous to think that this could be for the next iPhone.
A 4.6" screen with the iPhone's aspect ratio would be difficult to even hold.
This is achievable in the current form factor by eliminating/squeezing the home button and moving camera/speaker to the edge.
Apple would need to change the aspect ratio which would change the UI which is something Apple simply can't do.
They can execute it with ease and no pain for developers and users. All existing apps just run in the same resolution. Top/bottom screen areas may stay off or get used by OS notifications, multi-task controls etc.
The new apps that wish to utilize full screen (like browser, video players) just use new APIs to access the full wide display.
Very very simple!
In that sense I kind of expect the next iPhone to use a 768x1024 resolution.
This might still qualify as Retina display on a 4.6" size.
and even when increasing the screen size the actual iPhone might not be that much larger if Apple manages to reduce top and bottom sizes.
Remove the bottom button, replaced with a 4 or 5 finger gesture. Or make the button slim or put it on the side of the device.
Is is quite likely that Apple will try to standardize the current screen size madness of 4 sizes (orig. iPhone, iPhone doubled, orig. iPad, iPad doubled) down to just two: orig. iPad, iPad doubled.
In that sense I kind of expect the next iPhone to use a 768x1024 resolution.
This might still qualify as Retina display on a 4.6" size.
and even when increasing the screen size the actual iPhone might not be that much larger if Apple manages to reduce top and bottom sizes.
Remove the bottom button, replaced with a 4 or 5 finger gesture. Or make the button slim or put it on the side of the device.
1) 1024x768 is a 4:3 aspect ratio making it very, very wide and unwieldy for a phone. It would have to be smaller than the iPhone on the diagonal to be as wide.
2) 4.6" 1024x768 is 278 PPI, a little more than the iPad 3.
3) Reduing the top and bottom casing doesn't resolve the issue of width. IOW, how wide the device I on the short side. If Apple wants to maintain the same usability and not alter the aspect ratio then 4" would about the limit but that would require reducing the size bezel and/or making it thinner to retain the thumb sweep. For 4.6" to be feasible I would have to be a very widescreen display.
Is is quite likely that Apple will try to standardize the current screen size madness of 4 sizes (orig. iPhone, iPhone doubled, orig. iPad, iPad doubled) down to just two: orig. iPad, iPad doubled.
In that sense I kind of expect the next iPhone to use a 768x1024 resolution.
Why would they go from 3:2 to 4:3 on the next iPhone?
Remove the bottom button, replaced with a 4 or 5 finger gesture.
We always need a hardware out.
Or make the button slim or put it on the side of the device.
On the Android devices I've tried, that shuts the thing off prematurely for me.
For 4.6" to be feasible I would have to be a very widescreen display.
Calculations show that by making display edge-to-edge wide (2 1/4 inches instead of just 2) and round-corner-to-round-corner long (4 inches instead of 3), the diagonal would be
square root of (4^2 + 2.25^2) = 4.58938994 which is in line with the rumor
Without making screen width edge-to-edge the maximum for the current form factor is
square root of (4^2 + 2^2) = 4.47213595
We always need a hardware out.
Nice excuse. So what makes it so difficult to put that damn home button on the edge of the device along with power and volume buttons?
Nice excuse. So what makes it so difficult to put that damn home button on the edge of the device along with power and volume buttons?
They could do that and I quite like that idea but does it sound like a solution that Apple would incorporate?
If we're thinking of alternative ways to include a Home Button how about building it into the bottom 1/6th of the display much like the trackpads work?
Nice excuse. So what makes it so difficult to put that damn home button on the edge of the device along with power and volume buttons?
Because then you send it Home accidentally, as I previously stated.
As everyone knows, the hardware button sucks. Double-clicks work 50% of the time AT BEST.
And then maybe they should make all their products out of black plastic and race everyone else to the bottom!
We always need a hardware out. Who in the world would want a touch Home Button when the gestures are so much better for non-tactile work?
Apple should diversify its iPhone offerings JUST LIKE IT DID WITH THE IPOD LINE. That strategy was a success.
You're not understanding the difference between the iPod running a Linux-based OS and having no App Store and iOS-based iDevices. YOU CAN'T SWITCH DISPLAY SIZES, RESOLUTIONS, AND ASPECT RATIOS YEAR-OVER-YEAR LIKE THEY DID WITH THE iPOD NANO.
As everyone knows, the hardware button sucks. Double-clicks work 50% of the time AT BEST.
Being a physical button it's possible for the HW to be defective but I have no knowledge of double-clicking only working 50% of the time on iPod Touches, iPhones and iPads. Do you have documentation to back up this claim?
TS is right, you need the HW out. This not negotiable at this time. There is a reason these devices have HW buttons. It certainly wasn't because they couldn't figure out how to make them SW-based.
Apple should diversify its iPhone offerings JUST LIKE IT DID WITH THE IPOD LINE. That strategy was a success.
So a dumbphone for people who don't want apps, the mythical 2"-screened iPhone nano, a regular iPhone, and then a 5" phone for basketball players.
It was a success, sure, but the iPod touch is virtually redundant now and the iPod classic is dead. Matching that current situation up with a projection, that'd mean the real iPhone would be killed off in favor of just the 5" one and the dumbphone, and people don't really want dumbphones, so that'd be killed off…
So just the 2" and 5" models, then?
As everyone knows, the hardware button sucks.
It has always worked beautifully for me on all of my iDevices.
Double-clicks work 50% of the time AT BEST.
100% for me. But I suppose some hyperbole is in order.
Look, I absolutely love the gestures. I use them exclusively to get around… except when they don't work because an app is hanging. Then I simply tap the Home Button a single time and it immediately takes me where I want to go. It's comfort. It wouldn't feel right buying a device without that protection.
Macs still have physical power buttons. Because occasionally we have to hold them down for ten seconds and start anew. What happens when your computer's stuck and you go to press that software power button you so thoroughly campaigned for only to find that it's doing diddly-squat?
Yanking power cables is for Hollywood movies as a last resort when hackers are getting your data.
Because then you send it Home accidentally, as I previously stated.
It's quite opposite for me actually. It's the home button that I hit accidentally while playing games.