or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Microscopic analysis, iOS 8 code point to new 4.7-inch 'iPhone 6' display resolutions
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Microscopic analysis, iOS 8 code point to new 4.7-inch 'iPhone 6' display resolutions

post #1 of 48
Thread Starter 
Adding to the pile of supposed "iPhone 6" parts leaks, a report out of Russia claims to have put a display bound for Apple's 4.7-inch handset under the microscope, while new code discovered in Xcode suggests at least one new iPhone model will carry a 1,472-by-828-pixel resolution.




According to Russian luxury iPhone modification reseller Feld & Volk, the image above shows a close-up view of Apple's purported 4.7-inch iPhone 6 display with a 1 mm reference box overlaid on top of a grid of pixels, which the firm claims is evidence of a 1,704-by-906 resolution.

As noted by MacRumors, however, counting up the individual pixels within the bounded area comes out to 13 pixels in horizontal and vertical directions, much less than the 16 pixels per millimeter required for Feld & Volk's estimate. By comparison, the current iPhone 5s display boasts a 1,136-by-640-pixel resolution, or about 10.5 pixels per millimeter.

Perhaps offering consensus on the matter is new code discovered in Apple's latest Xcode 6 SDK. Spotted by 9to5Mac earlier today, a file containing instructions for iOS 8's Springboard, more commonly referred to as the iOS home screen, includes mention of a 414-by-736-pixel iPhone resolution.

Considering the point value method by which iPhone translates data, the actual hardware resolution would be double or triple that number, or 1,472-by-828 pixels. The new resolution from Xcode closely jibes with today's microscopic image analysis that yields a roughly 13-by-13-pixel per millimeter resolution, though a near-exact fit would come at around 14 pixels per millimeter.

All rumors will be put to bed when Apple debuts its handset or handsets next month. The company is expected to hold a special media event on Sept. 9 that will likely see the unveiling of a next-generation 4.7-inch iPhone and possibly a 5.5-inch phablet version.
post #2 of 48

1472x828: 363.05 PPI

1704x906: 410.61 PPI

 

Bet it’s the first one.

 

736x414: 337.78 PPI... at 2.5”. THE MYTHICAL IPHONE MINI AT LAST.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #3 of 48

Seems reasonable. There's absolutely no reason whatsoever that a phone needs to follow standardized resolutions like 720P or 1080P.

post #4 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

1472x828: 363.05 PPI

1704x906: 410.61 PPI

 

Bet it’s the first one.

 

736x414: 337.78 PPI... at 2.5”. THE MYTHICAL IPHONE MINI AT LAST.

Actually, on 4.7"

1472x828: 359 PPI

1704x906: 411 PPI

And on 5.5" if it's true:

1472x828: 307 PPI

1704x906: 351 PPI

 

They're all Retina, so I agree with the first resolution.

Congratulation to Samsung Galaxy S5 for winning CNET's Best Android Phone of the Year 2014

 

"From the owner of iPhone 6+, Best Smart Phone of the Year 2014"

Reply

Congratulation to Samsung Galaxy S5 for winning CNET's Best Android Phone of the Year 2014

 

"From the owner of iPhone 6+, Best Smart Phone of the Year 2014"

Reply
post #5 of 48
Originally Posted by fallenjt View Post
Actually, on 4.7"

1472x828: 359 PPI

1704x906: 411 PPI

 

Weird. My calculator gave me different numbers the first time.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #6 of 48
It'll be some multiple (maybe fractional) of 568 x 320 to fit in line with the aspect ratio of ext sing phones so that existing apps "work"

568 x 2.5 = 1420
320 x 2.5 = 800

so 1420 x 800 might be one

568 x 3 = 1704
320 x 3 = 960

so 1704 x 960 would be another choice
post #7 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

Seems reasonable. There's absolutely no reason whatsoever that a phone needs to follow standardized resolutions like 720P or 1080P.
Phones are now shipping with UHD displays. 1080p will pretty much be minimum for any high end device. At some point I think it will be hard for Apple to get away with less than 1080p on their flagship device.
post #8 of 48

I bet that a lot of people are going to have a hell of a hard time choosing between the models.

 

Apple always makes it hard to choose between various models.

 

If a person is only choosing by size, and nothing else, then the choice is easy of course, but what if somebody likes to take pictures and the camera is better on the 5.5"? What if the processor is slightly overclocked on the 5.5"? What if the larger phone has a better battery life due to its larger battery?

 

All I'm saying is that even though some people might think that they have decided upon which phone they want, once the models get introduced, some people might be changing their minds, due to differing features.

post #9 of 48

Let's talk about full assembled iPhone 6. It may not be thinner than iPhone 5S after all due to the curved edge screen.

Congratulation to Samsung Galaxy S5 for winning CNET's Best Android Phone of the Year 2014

 

"From the owner of iPhone 6+, Best Smart Phone of the Year 2014"

Reply

Congratulation to Samsung Galaxy S5 for winning CNET's Best Android Phone of the Year 2014

 

"From the owner of iPhone 6+, Best Smart Phone of the Year 2014"

Reply
post #10 of 48

Most video is in 720p or 1080p nowadays, so having perfect 1:1 match would eliminate scaling in most instances.  But I agree, it makes no difference whatsoever if you get a few more pixels.

post #11 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


Phones are now shipping with UHD displays. 1080p will pretty much be minimum for any high end device. At some point I think it will be hard for Apple to get away with less than 1080p on their flagship device.

Really? Let me laugh first, then comment: Haha...Apple never chase gimmicky specs. Did they make Octa core or even quad core CPU or  include 2GB/3GB RAM  in their mobile devices? Why would they want to abandon the term Retina that they patented to pursue something useless just to have what competitors have?

Congratulation to Samsung Galaxy S5 for winning CNET's Best Android Phone of the Year 2014

 

"From the owner of iPhone 6+, Best Smart Phone of the Year 2014"

Reply

Congratulation to Samsung Galaxy S5 for winning CNET's Best Android Phone of the Year 2014

 

"From the owner of iPhone 6+, Best Smart Phone of the Year 2014"

Reply
post #12 of 48
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post
Phones are now shipping with UHD displays. 1080p will pretty much be minimum for any high end device. At some point I think it will be hard for Apple to get away with less than 1080p on their flagship device.


Why? It’s garbage. You can’t see larger than a certain size, so anything beyond that size just wastes battery and GPU power.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #13 of 48

As for 1080, screw 1080.

 

Apple doesn't need to follow any lame standards. My retina iPad already has a higher than 1080 display. 

 

The people who like to boast about having 1080p on their phone displays are very likely mentally disabled Android people who watch 360p videos on their 1080p displays. Total morons.

 

And a 1080 display is 16:9, and Apple is not bound by any stupid standards like most Android monkeys are. Apple will do what they think is best for each particular product.

post #14 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 


Why? It’s garbage. You can’t see larger than a certain size, so anything beyond that size just wastes battery and GPU power.

and I won't see Apple going beyond Retina display much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

I bet that a lot of people are going to have a hell of a hard time choosing between the models.

 

Apple always makes it hard to choose between various models.

 

If a person is only choosing by size, and nothing else, then the choice is easy of course, but what if somebody likes to take pictures and the camera is better on the 5.5"? What if the processor is slightly overclocked on the 5.5"? What if the larger phone has a better battery life due to its larger battery?

 

All I'm saying is that even though some people might think that they have decided upon which phone they want, once the models get introduced, some people might be changing their minds, due to differing features.

What about there's no 5.5" at all? Now, everyone doesn't have to choose sizes.

Congratulation to Samsung Galaxy S5 for winning CNET's Best Android Phone of the Year 2014

 

"From the owner of iPhone 6+, Best Smart Phone of the Year 2014"

Reply

Congratulation to Samsung Galaxy S5 for winning CNET's Best Android Phone of the Year 2014

 

"From the owner of iPhone 6+, Best Smart Phone of the Year 2014"

Reply
post #15 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by fallenjt View Post
 

What about there's no 5.5" at all? Now, everyone doesn't have to choose sizes.

 

Sure, if that happens and there's only one size, then the choice will obviously be rather easy.

 

Even though I personally probably wont be getting one, I would like to see a 5.5" model in addition to the 4.7", then Apple will have left no stone unturned.

post #16 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

1472x828: 363.05 PPI

1704x906: 410.61 PPI

 

Bet it’s the first one.

 

736x414: 337.78 PPI... at 2.5”. THE MYTHICAL IPHONE MINI AT LAST.

iPhone mini, or iWatch?  :) 

Just shrink the physical size slightly, and bump up the PPI

post #17 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 
Why? It’s garbage. You can’t see larger than a certain size, so anything beyond that size just wastes battery and GPU power.

The only reason to have 1080 would be so every pixel has its true original color value instead of an interpolated value. Of course since the video is compressed, the pixels are already interpolated, so yeah it is not a difference you would ever see.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #18 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 

 

Sure, if that happens and there's only one size, then the choice will obviously be rather easy.

 

Even though I personally probably wont be getting one, I would like to see a 5.5" model in addition to the 4.7", then Apple will have left no stone unturned.


I would laugh so hard, if the 5.5 turns out to be a feint.

I'm dubious about many of the "leaked Apple parts".  I suspect many of them are from Chinese cloners, sprinkled with wishful thinking.

post #19 of 48

Let me be the first in this thread to invoke soggy's deaf man...

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #20 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoinAPhrase View Post
 

I would laugh so hard, if the 5.5 turns out to be a feint.

 

All we can do is speculate of course, but I do think that the 5.5 is real.

 

It may not come out at the same time as the 4.7, and it may be slightly delayed, but if I had to guess, then I'm going to say that it exists.

post #21 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by fallenjt View Post

Really? Let me laugh first, then comment: Haha...Apple never chase gimmicky specs. Did they make Octa core or even quad core CPU or  include 2GB/3GB RAM  in their mobile devices? Why would they want to abandon the term Retina that they patented to pursue something useless just to have what competitors have?
I guess I wasn't aware that 1080p was a gimmick. So is the only thing that's not a gimmick is Steve Jobs definition of retina? My co-worker recently purchased an LG G3. I'll have to borrow his phone and compare the display to my 5S. My 5S looks great to me but then I never held it next to another phone with higher ppi.
post #22 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


I guess I wasn't aware that 1080p was a gimmick. So is the only thing that's not a gimmick is Steve Jobs definition of retina? My co-worker recently purchased an LG G3. I'll have to borrow his phone and compare the display to my 5S. My 5S looks great to me but then I never held it next to another phone with higher ppi.

 

It's not gimmicky to go to a higher resolution, since the magic number of 300 ppi is in itself a marketing gimmick and arbitrary number pulled out of the air. The average person has better than 20/20 vision for most of their life, or if someone who wears glasses and has any kind of decent pair at all has it corrected to above 20/20, and so can easily see the pixels on a "retina" display at the prescribed viewing distance. 400+ ppi at an average distance of 12 in/30 cm would be a better and truer implementation of "retina" technology.

post #23 of 48
I would call the label 'retina' as a gimmick, but that does not mean an Apple retina display is not very, very good.

I have regularly compared my old iphone 5 screen against the newer 4.7 inch android screen at a higher resolution that I bought for my father, and I would say one's preference would depend on your attitude to things like colour accuracy. I can't see the pixels on either at viewing distance, and on both with my nose right up to the screen.

The OLED screen really saturates greens, blues and reds. I find that so annoying that any other benefit is totally negated. On the other hand the more accurate colour palate of the iphone at the initial comparison looks duller. On repeated viewing I appreciate it more and find the android screen cartoonish.
It's the heat death of the universe, my friends.
Reply
It's the heat death of the universe, my friends.
Reply
post #24 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzzypaws View Post

It's not gimmicky to go to a higher resolution, since the magic number of 300 ppi is in itself a marketing gimmick and arbitrary number pulled out of the air. The average person has better than 20/20 vision for most of their life, or if someone who wears glasses and has any kind of decent pair at all has it corrected to above 20/20, and so can easily see the pixels on a "retina" display at the prescribed viewing distance. 400+ ppi at an average distance of 12 in/30 cm would be a better and truer implementation of "retina" technology.

Baloney!

I just put my glasses on to look at the screen of my iPhone 4. No pixels seen. And yes the glasses are kept up to date and are properly prescriptioned.
post #25 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

I guess I wasn't aware that 1080p was a gimmick. So is the only thing that's not a gimmick is Steve Jobs definition of retina? My co-worker recently purchased an LG G3. I'll have to borrow his phone and compare the display to my 5S. My 5S looks great to me but then I never held it next to another phone with higher ppi.

More elite specs: but to what end?

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #26 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post
 

Seems reasonable. There's absolutely no reason whatsoever that a phone needs to follow standardized resolutions like 720P or 1080P.

 

Hmm, how about battery life, when the processor would not have to scale content provided in a standard resolution?

post #27 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


I guess I wasn't aware that 1080p was a gimmick. So is the only thing that's not a gimmick is Steve Jobs definition of retina? My co-worker recently purchased an LG G3. I'll have to borrow his phone and compare the display to my 5S. My 5S looks great to me but then I never held it next to another phone with higher ppi.

 

1080P on a phone is a gimmick. It's far beyond what any person could ever notice in terms of pixel density.

 

It's taking a number that people are familiar with (1080P TV's) and slapping it on a phone to make people go "oooohhh" when in fact it offers zero benefits and does nothing but suck more power.

post #28 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by jason98 View Post
 

 

Hmm, how about battery life, when the processor would not have to scale content provided in a standard resolution?

 

There have been several studies of what people do on their smartphones. Watching TV/movies is way down the list (less than 10%).

 

So a GPU/CPU having to scale videos for <10% of the time is going to use as much power as a high-PPI display that's sucking more power 100% of the time?

post #29 of 48
The pixel density required to eliminate most people's ability to distinguish pixelation in any way whatsoever is about 600 PPI. Being able to distinguish a pixel from other pixels is not the limit of human visual acuity thanks to the fact that a brain sits behind our eyes.


http://www.anandtech.com/show/7743/the-pixel-density-race-and-its-technical-merits
post #30 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

 

There have been several studies of what people do on their smartphones. Watching TV/movies is way down the list (less than 10%).

 

Are you sure? That surprises me.

 

In my case (which I fully appreciate is irrelevant to any discussion of the results of the survey), watching video is about 50% of my use! SkyTrain time killer.

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply
post #31 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post
 

 

1080P on a phone is a gimmick. It's far beyond what any person could ever notice in terms of pixel density.

 

It's taking a number that people are familiar with (1080P TV's) and slapping it on a phone to make people go "oooohhh" when in fact it offers zero benefits and does nothing but suck more power.

 

Within a few years, 1080p on TVs is going to seem like low resolution (and just for the record, there are no 1080p broadcasts - everyone is still broadcasting in either 1080i or 720p).   4K displays (which should really be called 2K displays, since they're actually 3840x2160) and within a few years 8K displays will become the standard.    Having said that, I agree that on a 5" or 6" screen, you won't see any difference for photos and videos.  But where increased resolution does provide a difference is in text.   It becomes much easier to read and the text can be read at smaller sizes, which is a lot easier than having to expand the size with one's fingers all the time.  

 

But I do agree that if it takes increased power, that's a big trade-off and might not be worth it until we're able to achieve much better battery life.

post #32 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post
 
But where increased resolution does provide a difference is in text.  

I have a lot of experience in typesetting. In the print industry, the plates are imaged at 2400+ dpi for artwork, which includes vector shapes and text. It doesn't matter how high the resolution is, if the text is below 4-5 point size, at least 50% of humans will not be able to read it without magnification. Now put that same text in a gray color on a lighter gray background and the percent of the population that can read it probably drops to around 25% and even less if the font face is a very thin typestyle. High resolution is great, but design sensibility is more important.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #33 of 48
As chadbag reveals, 1704x906 is a typo. To retain the HD aspect ratio of the iPhone 5/5c/5s, you'd need 1704x960. Someone swapped the last two digits.
post #34 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
  

if the text is below 4-5 point size, at least 50% of humans will not be able to read it without magnification.

 

I refuse to use text smaller than 5 points for print, 6 if it's really light or in reverse (like white text on a dark background). Some clients get pissed off when they can't cram 10 lines of text into a quarter inch, but they forget that they're looking at it blown up on a computer screen. Even when you show it to them at "actual size" they say it's only blurry because a computer screen isn't as sharp as the print off the press will be.

 

It's probably not a career move to fight with clients, but someone has to hold the line on common sense. Plus I don't have pressmen leaving flaming bags of poo on my porch because the middle of all the O's blew out on the plate!

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply

Lorin Schultz (formerly V5V)

Audio Engineer

V5V Digital Media, Vancouver, BC Canada

Reply
post #35 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

1080P on a phone is a gimmick. It's far beyond what any person could ever notice in terms of pixel density.

It's taking a number that people are familiar with (1080P TV's) and slapping it on a phone to make people go "oooohhh" when in fact it offers zero benefits and does nothing but suck more power.
A gimmick until Apple starts shipping phones with 1080p displays.
post #36 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lorin Schultz View Post

Are you sure? That surprises me.

In my case (which I fully appreciate is irrelevant to any discussion of the results of the survey), watching video is about 50% of my use! SkyTrain time killer.
I ride Skytrain to work and I check e-mail and catch up on news. Most people I see on Skytrain seem to be playing games or checking out Facebook.

Regardless, there have been several studies regarding smartphone use. Games are #1, which makes sense considering the top earners in the App Store.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post

A gimmick until Apple starts shipping phones with 1080p displays.

So instead of discussing whether or not 1080P is a gimmick based on perceived vs actual benefits you come back with that?
post #37 of 48

With regards to 1080p, the iPhone already supports recording at 1080p right? And the real point of HD video is to watch it on a big screen, so I don't think it is that big a deal as to whether the display resolution on the next iPhone is 1080p or not.

 

It may make a difference on the iPad, but frankly speaking, I simply use the Handbrake preset for Apple TV 3 to rip all my videos and that is fine for me on the iPad.

post #38 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricTheHalfBee View Post

I ride Skytrain to work and I check e-mail and catch up on news. Most people I see on Skytrain seem to be playing games or checking out Facebook.

Regardless, there have been several studies regarding smartphone use. Games are #1, which makes sense considering the top earners in the App Store.
So instead of discussing whether or not 1080P is a gimmick based on perceived vs actual benefits you come back with that?
I guess I don't consider something a gimmick because someone else has it and Apple doesn't. Why are we (likely) getting a new iPhone with a bigger screen? At the iPhone 5 launch didn't Apple tell us that they went with the size they did so people could comfortably use it with one hand? Is that still going to be the case if we get a 4.7" or 5.5" phone? Isn't the larger screen essentially a response to the market and to what other phone manufacturers have done that have become popular with consumers?
post #39 of 48
So much anonymous hardware engineering consulting going on in the forums... Just think of what companies like Apple could achieve if only their engineers listened to forum posts about how much power video scaling requires!!! If only they listened!!!

/s

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #40 of 48
Forum argument: "Displays suck for text until we get to 2500 pixels per inch density. Because I said so."

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
  • Microscopic analysis, iOS 8 code point to new 4.7-inch 'iPhone 6' display resolutions
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Microscopic analysis, iOS 8 code point to new 4.7-inch 'iPhone 6' display resolutions