or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Rumor: Apple to double 'iPhone 5S' Retina resolution to 1.5M pixels
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rumor: Apple to double 'iPhone 5S' Retina resolution to 1.5M pixels - Page 4

post #121 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


And why is this a problem? Really is it that much of a problem to support the required icons and images? I really don't think the majority of the complaints surround these trivial requirements. If that is what people are complaining about then I really feel sorry for them.

Honestly folks how long have icons been around? Further over the years how many different sizes have they come in? Bit depths?

I mean really we have people crying in their cereal over the need to supply a few images and icons. It is rather pathetic if you ask me. This is especially the case when you consider all the tools we have today to create such files.

 

So if your boss told you "please turn in your work as a Word document, and a PDF, and a PDF paginated to legal sized paper, and also as a plain text doc" you'd say "I'd be happy to; I feel sorry for anyone who complains about this."?

 

Don't get me wrong, Apple did a great job moving us to the retina display.  The pixel doubling solution/hack was well done and well implemented.  The fact that the only thing developers had to do with submit new images and icons and otherwise the apps just worked and looked pretty was excellent.  But it IS a nuisance and introducing a third resolution (which Apple won't do) would drive a lot of us to drink.

 

My complaint was with your assertion that developers are doing it wrong if they have any artwork that needs to be updated.  Unless all our interface elements are supposed to be text or simple shapes, this is just wrong.

post #122 of 157
looool officially worst rumor story ever. Couple months late for April fools guys.
post #123 of 157
I don't believe apple will times its resolution of 16 times original!
post #124 of 157

Who cares about retina display. I am 62 years old and been using Apple since the Apple IIe. My eyes and fingers need a much bigger screen. Come on Apple listen to us and stop this silly retina hype.

 

Gonna keep my iPhone 4 until you make what we 'Really" need.

post #125 of 157
Originally Posted by FredDavenport View Post
…what we 'Really" need.


I'm glad you put that in quotes; I would have otherwise.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #126 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I'm glad you put that in quotes; I would have otherwise.

 

Why?  

 

The rest of us are smart enough that we don't need anyone to do that for us.

 

Surprise.  We understand normal conversation idioms.

post #127 of 157
Originally Posted by KDarling View Post
Why?  

 

The rest of us are smart enough that we don't need anyone to do that for us.

 

Surprise.  We understand normal conversation idioms.

 

I cringed reading this. It's the best retort you can do?

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #128 of 157

No one really cares about Retina Display. Just asked the millions who are buying Samsung's larger phones.

 

Come on Apple we need, want and DEMAND a larger iPhone. If you can make a smaller iPad, you can make a larger iPhone.

 

My 61 year old eyes and fingers need a larger iPhone. Will keep my iPhone 4 until there is a "much" larger iPhone 5s, 6 or 7.

 

Please, Please, Please Larger iPhone.

post #129 of 157
Originally Posted by FredDavenport View Post
No one really cares about Retina Display.

 

And there goes any shred of an argument you might have had.


Just asked the millions who are buying Samsung's larger phones.

 

Which. Have. Retina. Displays.


Come on Apple we need, want and DEMAND a larger iPhone. 

 

Stop. No one needs, few want, and no one demands.


Will keep my iPhone 4 until there is a "much" larger iPhone 5s, 6 or 7.

 

Again, nonsense. That you refuse to actually buy something larger to suit your whining says you don't actually care about this.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #130 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by FredDavenport View Post

No one really cares about Retina Display. Just asked the millions who are buying Samsung's larger phones.

 

Come on Apple we need, want and DEMAND a larger iPhone. If you can make a smaller iPad, you can make a larger iPhone.

 

My 61 year old eyes and fingers need a larger iPhone. Will keep my iPhone 4 until there is a "much" larger iPhone 5s, 6 or 7.

 

Please, Please, Please Larger iPhone.

 

Those millions of Samsung phones also have retina-calibur displays, which refers to resolution and dpi. Retina is just a marketing term Apple came up with when such high dpi wasn't common at all. 

 

As for you, if you're being genuine, I sincerely recommend you just go ahead and buy a larger Android phone (S4, Note, etc). Apple is not going to make what you're looking for anytime soon, especially a "much" larger iPhone. If size is such a big factor for you, s you state, I don't understand why you'd be willing to wait several more years for a large iPhone that may never come. Just buy what suits your needs today. 

post #131 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by herbapou View Post

 

Actually on the ipad side what I would like to see is a move to the 16:9 aspect ratio. 

What I like about the iPad is its 4:3 screen.

post #132 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by smalM View Post

What I like about the iPad is its 4:3 screen.

I think 3:2 would have been an overall better choice, but 16:9 isn't a good choice. The 4:3 and 3:2 ratios work better for a bigger variety of uses. 16:9 sacrifices so much screen height/width and only for one use, it makes other uses feel more cramped.
post #133 of 157
Not going to happen. 312ppi is crisp enough. Increasing resolution further would increase costs, power consumption, and create more headaches for developers for minimal benefit to the end user.
 
For every data point Apple lists in the technical specifications sheet you can easilly find at least one android phone that bests the iPhone. What allows the iPhone to achieve the best overall experience is the appropiate design compromises combined with the simplicity and peace of mind of the iOS user experience and App Store respectively.
post #134 of 157
I really love Apple products, but the phone has definitely gotten too small for me.

I just know that Apple will make a Retina 1080p 4.5" phone for me with double the battery life and double the storage. And with the ability to enable some apps to run in the background periodically, so they always have fresh data when I open the app (I.e. Zinio, PressReader and Good for Enterprise). And widgets, too, that function similarly, so the weather and traffic maps are instantly up-to-date when I need the data.

I'll pay whatever. Thanks and keep up the great work!

Oh, and I've always wanted to be able to run my iPhone and iPad apps on my laptop, too. Thanks! 1smile.gif
post #135 of 157
Originally Posted by NumeriusNegidius
I just know that Apple will make a Retina 1080p 4.5" phone for me with double the battery life and double the storage. And with the ability to enable some apps to run in the background periodically, so they always have fresh data when I open the app (I.e. Zinio, PressReader and Good for Enterprise). And widgets, too, that function similarly, so the weather and traffic maps are instantly up-to-date when I need the data.

 

Go buy an Android.


Oh, and I've always wanted to be able to run my iPhone and iPad apps on my laptop, too. Thanks! 1smile.gif

 

This will never happen. Ever.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #136 of 157
It'd be overkill. Show me one human than can perceive anything higher than Retina resolution. We're at the point where we don't need any more pixels, especially shoved into a tiny display.
post #137 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Go buy an Android.

This will never happen. Ever.

No, I want an iPhone with a bigger 1080p screen. I bet millions of others do, too.

But you're right that Android phones are an option. It seems that many have chosen to buy one of those phones in order to get a bigger screen.

Anyway, I'm sure Apple will offer a bigger, premium 1080p screen option, and that their stock price will skyrocket once it's announced.
post #138 of 157
Originally Posted by NumeriusNegidius View Post
Anyway, I'm sure Apple will offer a bigger, premium 1080p screen option, and that their stock price will skyrocket once it's announced.

 

How's that 2.5", data-less, no-app iPhone treating you? Oh, wait. That never existed. Well, at least you can upgrade your xMac to make yourself feel better. Oops.

 

What possible explanation do you have for their stock going up after announcing a horrible device?

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #139 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Again, nonsense. That you refuse to actually buy something larger to suit your whining says you don't actually care about this.

 

- We understand that you don't, but it must be clear by now that lots of other people want a larger screen.

- See, above, and add "Especially older eyes and fat fingers."

- Wanting a larger screen does not equate to "want Android." We still want iOS, but bigger.

- Aside from fanboys and technogeeks, NOBODY walks into a store thinking "I want an iPhone because it has a RETINA screen." Ordinary people don't even know what that means. They buy it because it's shiny, works with their other stuff and says "Apple" on it.

- We stick with our antiquated devices because we're voting with our wallets. I'm not buying an iP5 either, because it's not what I want. I'm not buying a Samsung because it's not what I want. When someone makes what I want, I'll buy it. In a perfect world, that will be a larger iPhone.

 

I'm not sure what you accomplish my jumping all over anyone who expresses any or all of the above, but I'll again counter just so the person you're insulting doesn't feel like he's alone.

post #140 of 157
"jusephe 2013/05/28 08:47am
That equals an very strange resolution of about 1632 by 919 pixels. And about 468 ppi !

I think they could rather go straight to full HD or some nicer resolution like 1600 by 900.

But if this happen or not, most people will not tell the difference, unless Apple will improve the display in other areas as well."


Yes, i believe 1600x900 is what will result. I think 1.5 million is a shortcut for 1.44 million. Like some would say... 1gb is 1000mb , where is reality , 1gb is 1024mb.
post #141 of 157
Originally Posted by v5v View Post
[post]

 

Your post might make sense if you'd payed attention to anything he had said.

 

Justify his internal logic of keeping the smallest phone possible while whining about wanting a larger one.

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply

Originally posted by Relic

...those little naked weirdos are going to get me investigated.
Reply
post #142 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Your post might make sense if you'd payed attention to anything he had said.

 

Justify his internal logic of keeping the smallest phone possible while whining about wanting a larger one.

 

I saw and responded to that. I'm doing the same thing.

 

I bought an iPhone when, at least as far as I knew, it was pretty much the only game in town. I wanted what it offered: maps with GPS in my pocket and the ability to check my email on the road. I was amazed and impressed.

 

Over time I began to realize that the format was really just too small to be practical for some applications. Being able to read street names on a map requires zooming in to where only two or three blocks are visible. Typing is cramped, so it's uncomfortable for longer messages. Web pages require so much zooming and scrolling as to be next to useless. I was, and am, still happy to have those capabilities AT ALL, even in a less-than-perfect size, but my excitement was tempered somewhat by the fact that I would only use them as a last resort, not readily, conveniently and happily.

 

When my second 3GS wore out I bought a 4. At that point we still hadn't seen larger screens from other manufacturers (or at least *I* hadn't).

 

In the time I've owned it we've seen a variety of screen sizes from other manufacturers. I've looked into some of them and found the larger screen much better suited to my preferences. The problem was they weren't iPhones. I wouldn't get automatic syncing with my Mac via iCloud, ITunes integration or protection from malware, so I didn't buy one.

 

I still want an iPhone, but I also want a larger screen. Since my 4 still works there's no pressing need to buy anything else. Obviously I would like a faster processor and LTE, but those are not worth ~$800 to me.

 

So I wait. The phone I have works and is paid for. So far Apple doesn't make a screen size I want and no one else makes a phone with iOS, so if I'm gonna suffer with a smaller screen ANYWAY, I might as well do it with the one I have and not spend a pile of money on something I won't really be happy with. When my 4 wears out I'll be forced to make a decision, but until then I can wait and wish.

 

Make sense?

post #143 of 157
What would make sense for Applr to adopt HD native resolutions, for better viewing and less GPU use for video scaling.

So a 720*1280 or 768*1366 instead of the current 640*1136 for the small form factor devices.
post #144 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

What would make sense for Applr to adopt HD native resolutions, for better viewing and less GPU use for video scaling.

So a 720*1280 or 768*1366 instead of the current 640*1136 for the small form factor devices.

I'll make a deal with you. You run a battery of tests on the battery of 640x1136 video compared to 720x1280 video on the iPhone 5 and I'll tell you why it's pointless to completely mess with the entire OS, developers and customers to support 720p whilst ignoring all other common resolutions for video.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #145 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

What would make sense for Applr to adopt HD native resolutions, for better viewing and less GPU use for video scaling.

So a 720*1280 or 768*1366 instead of the current 640*1136 for the small form factor devices.

I'll make a deal with you. You run a battery of tests on the battery of 640x1136 video compared to 720x1280 video on the iPhone 5 and I'll tell you why it's pointless to completely mess with the entire OS, developers and customers to support 720p whilst ignoring all other common resolutions for video.

 

The resolutions that 'matter' are those available in the iTunes store, because those are the resolutions that make money. YouTube etc. are not relevant, these are freebies that help Apple's competitors. Plus these videos are usually short, but if you watch a feature film on the iPhone, that's where it starts to matter.

Going to 1366*768 also allows for video mirroring to/from computers with less pain.

Given that both of these are more or less industry standard resolutions, it was odd that Apple chose some oddball resolutions in the first place.

post #146 of 157
I suppose having a slightly higher resolution would help reduce the amount of cpu cycles used for the scaling required to render full HD. However I agree with bcode, it would be yet another resolution to support for developers. I suppose as long as the proportions of the screen is kept the same you can somewhat control the fragmentation due to resolution.
post #147 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

The resolutions that 'matter' are those available in the iTunes store, because those are the resolutions that make money.

Using this logic then all displays no matter small or large should be 16:9 1080p. Do you not see a problem with that?
Quote:
Going to 1366*768 also allows for video mirroring to/from computers with less pain.

Using this logic then all displays no matter small or large should be 16:9 1080p. Do you not see a problem with that?

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #148 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xennex View Post

I suppose having a slightly higher resolution would help reduce the amount of cpu cycles used for the scaling required to render full HD. However I agree with bcode, it would be yet another resolution to support for developers. I suppose as long as the proportions of the screen is kept the same you can somewhat control the fragmentation due to resolution.

 

Apple's APIs and developers' coding practices need to start to be resolution independent. I mean, does anyone ask how many screen resolutions the mac has, or what window size a particular device has? Even in full screen mode on the mac there are a variety of resolutions and developers deal with it just fine.

 

There may need to be a threshold, once screen size/resolution goes above a certain limit, you start displaying iPad GUI, but it's a shame that by now there are still developers who make iPhone and iPad apps, just to milk the market, instead of creating universal iOS apps.

post #149 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

...does anyone ask how many screen resolutions the mac has, or what window size a particular device has? Even in full screen mode on the mac there are a variety of resolutions and developers deal with it just fine.

This has been answered in excessive detail since at least 2010 when the iPhone 4 was released.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #150 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

The resolutions that 'matter' are those available in the iTunes store, because those are the resolutions that make money.

Using this logic then all displays no matter small or large should be 16:9 1080p. Do you not see a problem with that?
Quote:
Going to 1366*768 also allows for video mirroring to/from computers with less pain.

Using this logic then all displays no matter small or large should be 16:9 1080p. Do you not see a problem with that?

 

No, you don't see what I'm saying, and I have absolutely no problem with what I'm saying, otherwise I wouldn't say it.

 

Using this logic all displays on CPU constrained platforms should be standard resolutions, or displays that can display standard resolutions without scaling.

That includes 720p as well, which may be perfectly fine for smaller screens. It would also allow e.g. for 960*1280, which is a 4:3 aspect ratio that can display 720p (720x1280) without scaling.

 

This does not necessarily apply to Macs who have plenty of CPU/CPU roast, and are usually hooked up to a power line, but even there, non-integer factor scaling of bitmapped graphics always causes artefacts, so video scaling is always an ugly thing by its very nature.

post #151 of 157
I'd be surprised if Apple is actually doing this.

The eye can't discern a higher resolution than a 'retina display', can it? So why would it be necessary or desirable to go further than that? Does a higher resolution actually appear more 'photo-real', or is it just meant to impress the 'spec-centric' among us?

I'd think that once 'retina' resolution was achieved, any additional visible benefit would only come from more accurate color space, better black level, contrast, etc.

It's possible additional pixels would allow for smoother gradation, etc. but is it really discernible to the naked eye at those sizes/resolutions?


Adding a higher resolution demands more energy management and app development resources. All considered, would those be worthwhile trade-offs? I'm thinking not.

I also find it a bit gimmicky that companies are applying the "1080p format" concept to handsets. Maybe there's some benefit, but I'm not seeing it. It seems more like a contrived marketing 'connection' to a popular format than anything really beneficial.

Correct me if I'm wrong about all this. I'm interested in other perspectives...
post #152 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

 

That strikes me as the perfect screen - one-to-one pixel representation of HD video at a size large enough to see roughly half a web page at legible scale.

 

Really? Half a web page at 'legible scale'? Sure, you could display it. I do that on my iPhone now, but it isn't at all legible (OK, maybe the occasional large headline), I don't think those would be any more legible on a 4.7" screen just because the resolution is higher.

post #153 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by tribalogical View Post

I also find it a bit gimmicky that companies are applying the "1080p format" concept to handsets. Maybe there's some benefit, but I'm not seeing it. It seems more like a contrived marketing 'connection' to a popular format than anything really beneficial.

The main benefit is that no scaling of video is required, which is computationally expensive (i.e. eats battery) and introduces visual artefacts (although they may not be too visible at retina-resolution-levels).
However, much more useful, would have been if Apple had used the 720p spec, i.e. 720x1280 instead of the 640x1136 they currently have.
post #154 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

The main benefit is that no scaling of video is required, which is computationally expensive (i.e. eats battery) and introduces visual artefacts (although they may not be too visible at retina-resolution-levels).
However, much more useful, would have been if Apple had used the 720p spec, i.e. 720x1280 instead of the 640x1136 they currently have.

Scaling is very efficiently done in the GPU, it's not very computationally expensive. It would have been nice to do 720p though, to have a slightly larger screen.
post #155 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

The main benefit is that no scaling of video is required, which is computationally expensive (i.e. eats battery) and introduces visual artefacts (although they may not be too visible at retina-resolution-levels).
However, much more useful, would have been if Apple had used the 720p spec, i.e. 720x1280 instead of the 640x1136 they currently have.

Scaling is very efficiently done in the GPU, it's not very computationally expensive. It would have been nice to do 720p though, to have a slightly larger screen.

Well, in battery operated devices "efficiently" and "not very computationaly expensive" have quite a different context. Of course, scaling is quick, as e.g. seen when zooming around in photos with finger pinches. But if you watch a 2h feature film and it has to be scaled vs. it has not to be scaled, it could add up in terms of power consumption.

Maybe they have a fixed video decoding/deinterlacing/scaling pipeline that has a constant power consumption regardless of whether or not the scaling part is running at unity or not, but so far I haven't heard anyone make that claim. And then of course, it's also a matter of what quality the scaling is done at, just as for deinterlacing, there are a variety of different algorithms with varying quality and computational cost. Probably doesn't matter much, because I doubt the videophile will watch movies on the iPhone on an ongoing basis.

Still, a bit like running all digital music through SRC instead of just playing it at the native sampling rate.
post #156 of 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by rcfa View Post

Well, in battery operated devices "efficiently" and "not very computationaly expensive" have quite a different context. Of course, scaling is quick, as e.g. seen when zooming around in photos with finger pinches. But if you watch a 2h feature film and it has to be scaled vs. it has not to be scaled, it could add up in terms of power consumption.

It's negligible compared to the computational cost of decoding h.264. Drop-in-the-bucket negligible, if not drop-in-the-ocean negligible.
post #157 of 157

This big bump in resolution is pointless on a 4" screen.

 

For one, the fusion of a tiny battery and a huge GPU crushing resolution is a bad combination.

 

And really, over 300 PPI on a 4" screen? What's the point?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Rumor: Apple to double 'iPhone 5S' Retina resolution to 1.5M pixels