AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Developers at WWDC not worried about iPhone, iPad screen size changes
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Developers at WWDC not worried about iPhone, iPad screen size changes - Page 2

post #41 of 62
6/18/12 at 3:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post

I agree.
Even if Apple does come out with some amazing new payment technology... in the short term... only a handful of retailers will even use it. Who knows how long it will take to become as ubiquitous as accepting credit cards is now.
Right now... I can swipe my debit card anywhere cards are accepted... which is pretty much everywhere. I, personally, never have a problem with that.

Sure, but people said the same thing about CC and debit cards before they were commonplace. There was the argument that if you got robbed someone would have access to a lot more funds than the typically small sum you have in cash. I don't think the concept of being protected from fraudulent purchases was part of the initial setup.

As for the speed there was an event just last week that showed an app called Passbook that is part way for what a successful system could do.

Again, it adds more security than keeping cards with numbers, signatures, and user and bank names printed plainly on them. I want my financial data to be kept in a heavily encrypted file, like 1Password, until such time that I need it, not placed on plastic cards that anyone can read and copy if they get ahold of the item for a brief moment.

"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"

Reply

"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"

Reply
post #42 of 62
6/18/12 at 3:59pm

I really hope they dont go to a 16:9 iPhone. It looks so awkward... It seems Apple is in an awkward place, larger screen with same ratio and developers are mad, larger screen with 16:9 ratio and the consumer is mad, and of course no matter what they do the media will of course be mad.

Reply
Reply
post #43 of 62
6/18/12 at 5:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

They might but neither of those technologies are as secure as NFC and neither of them are ideal for majority of businesses. NFC's unique properties allow it to create a very small loop between devices. Even Low Energy Bluetooth can have a 50 meter range so your only security measure is the encryption used to send the data. NFC's loop is only about 6" and uses a secure handshake that makes it very difficult to intercept another's data.
In many ways it's more secure than a CC card because there is no way one can copy the number by sight, a camera, carbon paper, and it's less likely to see or capture a PIN when that PIN is only be used on your handheld device. It's also easier to cancel all cards immediately if your phone is stolen by locking and erasing the device and auto-informing all financial institutions registered with the device than by having to remember what was in your wallet and then dig up numbers for each.
"NFC*. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon... and for the rest of your life."
* Or an NFC-like alternative.

No. NFC is going, going, gone. There is no need for it. Almost no businesses right now are ready for it. It requires new hardware—expensive hardware. There's no evidence it's taking off. So far, Google's initiative has frozen. They're all waiting for Apple. But BT 4 is much better. even WiFi is much better. It works for Apple, and I'm willing to bet that many other companies have been looking at that.

Even if a sales person is needed to remove the stupid RFD tags, it will work better than NFC. And you don't need more chips in the phone. No one really wants that.
Reply
Reply
post #44 of 62
6/18/12 at 5:22pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by avium View Post

Um, nothing I said is incorrect. Android apps have fragmentation issues when developers opt out from the prescribed approach, e.g., while developing highly-custom UIs for games. And I can't speak to how well Android's layout scheme works in general (I'm not an Android user) but I assume it works pretty well for vanilla stuff.



 



Quoting from http://developer.android.com/guide/practices/screens_support.html#screen-independence ...



 



 



Yes, I know all about it, we've discussed this many times. What Google says is nice, but the real world is that is doesn't work well at all.
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 62
6/18/12 at 5:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

That has never been his position. It's always been, just like mine and others, that the 6th generation iPhone with a presumed Apple A6 chip running iOS 6 would not be called iPhone 5. Additionally, the argument arose when people stated that iPhone 6 didn't make any sense when '5' was erroneously rationalized to come after '4S'.

You guys are just as irrational to think that just because this is the sixth phone, it's also the sixth generation. You also don't understand the marketing considerations.

But it's really not important at all. It doesn't matter what it's called.
Reply
Reply
post #46 of 62
6/19/12 at 11:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post


Yes, I know all about it, we've discussed this many times. What Google says is nice, but the real world is that is doesn't work well at all.

If Android can't lay out basic GUI elements using the prescribed XML-based approach supported / documented by Google, then Google really dropped the ball. For the time being, a robust resolution-independent layout mechanism is infinitely more important to Android than to iOS.

Reply
Reply
post #47 of 62
6/19/12 at 12:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by avium View Post

If Android can't lay out basic GUI elements using the prescribed XML-based approach supported / documented by Google, then Google really dropped the ball. For the time being, a robust resolution-independent layout mechanism is infinitely more important to Android than to iOS.

The problem is that their method tries to do what isn't possible. With fragmentation of the hardware market, not only are there phones with different sized screens and resolutions, there are phones with different ratios. And that's one place where their software doesn't work well.

So circles get turned into ellipses, ellipses get turned into circles. Squares turned into rectangles, rectangles into squares. Fixed size graphics and photos are either mis-sized, or left the same size, messing up the composition of the page. Parts of the page are offscreen, never to be seen again. Type is too small or too big, etc.

Then manufacturers try to make "tablets" with 2.33 or earlier which Google says very strongly is NOT a tablet OS. That makes things even worse.

No one used 3.0 to any great extent, and even now, eight months after introduction, 4 is just at 7% adoption. It's a mess!
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 62
6/19/12 at 12:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

You guys are just as irrational to think that just because this is the sixth phone, it's also the sixth generation. You also don't understand the marketing considerations.
But it's really not important at all. It doesn't matter what it's called.

I'm only considering the marketing considerations. It's the only rational position for the consumer to make. If an Apple engineer who works on the internals wants to say that it was the casing that mostly changed from the 1st to 2nd iPhone thereby making the SoC the same generation YoY then his position would be valid. If 3GPP wants to say that UMTS at ~300kb/s is the same generation as HSPA+ at ~80Mb/s because of certain technologies used then they have that right but that doesn't mean that the technology used to increase the speeds is uses the same generation of technology and equipment. LTE is on it's 3rd generation mobile HW yet from the consumer's PoV it's just being labeled 4G tech. I would have expected you to know the PoV makes a difference.

"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"

Reply

"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"

Reply
post #49 of 62
6/19/12 at 2:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I'm only considering the marketing considerations. It's the only rational position for the consumer to make. If an Apple engineer who works on the internals wants to say that it was the casing that mostly changed from the 1st to 2nd iPhone thereby making the SoC the same generation YoY then his position would be valid. If 3GPP wants to say that UMTS at ~300kb/s is the same generation as HSPA+ at ~80Mb/s because of certain technologies used then they have that right but that doesn't mean that the technology used to increase the speeds is uses the same generation of technology and equipment. LTE is on it's 3rd generation mobile HW yet from the consumer's PoV it's just being labeled 4G tech. I would have expected you to know the PoV makes a difference.

I understand POV very well. But what I'm seeing here is the use of the word "irrational" to describe those who don't agree on this. That's more than just POV. And Cook himself blurred the lines in his interview. Considering that virtually everyone calls this the iPhone5, perhaps the very few who think that it's really the iPhone 6 are the ones with the cockeyed worldview.

I don't care one way or the other, but I do think that making an assumption that this is THE Gen6 phone, and therefor, if a number is assigned, it MUST be 6, is nuts.

It might be 6, but none of the arguments I've seen assure that it must be. Even though you and our other friend think so strenuously otherwise, there are a number of ways of looking at this that are just as valid, and possibly more valid. But you're not willing to look at them and say that we might have a point. You just dismiss them out of hand.

In one way or another, I've been involved in advertising and marketing my whole adult life. I think I understand some of it by now.
Reply
Reply
post #50 of 62
6/19/12 at 2:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I understand POV very well. But what I'm seeing here is the use of the word "irrational" to describe those who don't agree on this. That's more than just POV. And Cook himself blurred the lines in his interview. Considering that virtually everyone calls this the iPhone5, perhaps the very few who think that it's really the iPhone 6 are the ones with the cockeyed worldview.
I don't care one way or the other, but I do think that making an assumption that this is THE Gen6 phone, and therefor, if a number is assigned, it MUST be 6, is nuts.
It might be 6, but none of the arguments I've seen assure that it must be. Even though you and our other friend think so strenuously otherwise, there are a number of ways of looking at this that are just as valid, and possibly more valid. But you're not willing to look at them and say that we might have a point. You just dismiss them out of hand.
In one way or another, I've been involved in advertising and marketing my whole adult life. I think I understand some of it by now.


Regardless of what they call it it's the generation 6 iPhone that will appear in the 6th year since its release which a very distinct line drawn between it and each of the other 5 models that came before it and has absolutely no barring on what the nomenclature, hence AI, myself and others using "6th generation iPhone" instead of calling it iPhone 5, iPhone 6, 'the new iPhone.' etc.. This can not be argued!

"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"

Reply

"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"

Reply
post #51 of 62
6/19/12 at 5:48pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Regardless of what they call it it's the generation 6 iPhone that will appear in the 6th year since its release which a very distinct line drawn between it and each of the other 5 models that came before it and has absolutely no barring on what the nomenclature, hence AI, myself and others using "6th generation iPhone" instead of calling it iPhone 5, iPhone 6, 'the new iPhone.' etc.. This can not be argued!

That's just your opinion, and I think it's wrong.
Reply
Reply
post #52 of 62
6/19/12 at 5:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

That's just your opinion, and I think it's wrong.

So you're a 'model identifier' man, eh? lol.gif
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #53 of 62
6/20/12 at 12:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

So you're a 'model identifier' man, eh? lol.gif

As much as anyone else.
Reply
Reply
post #54 of 62
6/20/12 at 1:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

As much as anyone else.

Well, you're more so than Apple apparently, as the iPhone 4 is the "3,1", so Apple must be wrong.
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #55 of 62
6/21/12 at 8:03am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Well, you're more so than Apple apparently, as the iPhone 4 is the "3,1", so Apple must be wrong.

I don't even know what you're talking about there.
Reply
Reply
post #56 of 62
6/21/12 at 8:11am

They could make it longer and wider... also rounder. Then they could call it "the iStick", and it would sell well with the ladies. Hmmm. Forget I said anything.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

Reply
post #57 of 62
6/21/12 at 8:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

I don't even know what you're talking about there.

Internally Apple numbers their models with the iPhone just as they've done with their other Darwin-based products.

iPhone — 1,1
iPhone 3G — 1,2
iPhone 3GS — 2,1
iPhone 4 (GSM) — 3,1
iPhone 4 (CDMA) — 3,3
iPhone 4S — 4,1

So using Apple system of determining major architectural changes there have been 4 distinct models from the PoV of the SoC engineers.

"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"

Reply

"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"

Reply
post #58 of 62
6/21/12 at 10:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Internally Apple numbers their models with the iPhone just as they've done with their other Darwin-based products.
iPhone — 1,1
iPhone 3G — 1,2
iPhone 3GS — 2,1
iPhone 4 (GSM) — 3,1
iPhone 4 (CDMA) — 3,3
iPhone 4S — 4,1
So using Apple system of determining major architectural changes there have been 4 distinct models from the PoV of the SoC engineers.

Ok, so that goes with my saying that the next iPhone would be a fifth gen model, and not a sixth gen model, along with other indicators, such as case, display, etc.
Reply
Reply
post #59 of 62
6/21/12 at 10:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Ok, so that goes with my saying that the next iPhone would be a fifth gen model, and not a sixth gen model, along with other indicators, such as case, display, etc.

But what you're saying has no baring on the reality of the consumer market. You've never once qualified your statement to refer to the architectural design of the SoC.

On top of that, those primary values do not have one to one relationships with the case designs. If it did then the iPhone 3G would be listed as 2,1 not 1,2.

The new MBAs that were updated are the next generation MBAs. This is how we know it's the new model. I can't imagine if someone asked you which MBA to buy you'd say it doesn't matter because they haven't had a new generation in x many years simply because the case looks the same.

The term in technology was born out of the definition "all of the people born and living at about the same time." Do you not think of your daughter as a new generation over you when she has half your DNA and half your wife's DNA? Of course you do, and in that same vain the 2012 iPhone will be the 6th generation iPhone that Apple will have put out YoY since 2007 in a very public and well known event where have clearly made the generational demarcation point.

"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"

Reply

"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"

Reply
post #60 of 62
6/21/12 at 10:16am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Ok, so that goes with my saying that the next iPhone would be a fifth gen model, and not a sixth gen model, along with other indicators, such as case, display, etc.

To which I already replied something to the effect of, "Apparently Apple doesn't even know this, as they called their 3rd gen model the 'iPhone 4'."
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #61 of 62
6/21/12 at 11:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

But what you're saying has no baring on the reality of the consumer market. You've never once qualified your statement to ref to the architectural design of the SoC.
On top of that, those primary values do not have one to one relationships with the case designs. If it did then the iPhone 3G would be listed as 2,1 not 1,2.
The new MBAs that were updated are the next generation MBAs. This is how we know it's the new model. I can't imagine if someone asked you which MBA to buy you'd say it doesn't matter because they haven't had a new generation in x many years simply because thecase looks the same.
The term in technology was born out of the definition "all of the people born and living at about the same time." Do you not think of your daughter as a new generation over you when she has half your DNA and half your wife's DNA? Of course you do, and in that same vain the 2012 iPhone will be the 6th generation iPhone that Apple will have put out YoY since 2007 in a very public and well known event where have clearly made the generational demarcation point.

Really, you guys can just keep saying whatever you want to. But in the end it doesn't matter. Apple will call this whatever they want to, and that will make it correct
Reply
Reply
post #62 of 62
6/21/12 at 11:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

Really, you guys can just keep saying whatever you want to. But in the end it doesn't matter. Apple will call this whatever they want to, and that will make it correct

I've clearly stated from the beginning that the marketing name has no barring on the internal architectural generation or the YoY generational name. My stance has always been that Apple could call it iPhone 5 but calling the 6th iPhone running iOS 6 with a presumed Apple A6 chip is not likely to be called an iPhone 5. You can say that those three things make it perfectly logical to call it an iPhone 5 but it doesn't.

"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"

Reply

"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Developers at WWDC not worried about iPhone, iPad screen size changes