Nope. I was hoping to replace three devices (phone, Palm TX and iPod) with one. Going to Android means I'll be able to reduce that to two, but the iPod won't get retired. I won't be able to go to an iPod + iPhone setup (even later) because there's only one checkbox per item in iTunes to manage what does and doesn't get synced.
He did say that they kept the pixel size of the camera sensor the same and added a backlighting feature to help add more photons to the higher pixel density. These are the little things necessary with increased pixel density to actually take a better image.
Other phone manufacturers increase megapixels by shrinking pixels.
Yes. And there are several methods to do that. The backlit sensor is a major feature. Sony first came out with these for their D-SLR's. People don't understand how a sensor works. The circuits are actually ABOVE the sensing sites. This technology reverses the chip, making it more sensitive, as the light doesn't have to go through those layers.
Apple may be using a slightly larger chip as well. I believe I read that about this chip. In addition, Canon, and others, are making chips with less dead space between the sensing sites, allowing the sites to be larger.
>> I think they REALLY need a portable storage system that connects to the dock port or something. Here's the real kicker -- how many MINUTES of HD video are you really going to edit with a max of 32G? Maybe 15?
My son has a Flip HD which can do 2 hours of 720P video in 2 GB.
>> I think they REALLY need a portable storage system that connects to the dock port or something. Here's the real kicker -- how many MINUTES of HD video are you really going to edit with a max of 32G? Maybe 15?
Storage space is as important to video editing as a good antenna and battery life are to a phone. So I'd even go with a thicker phone myself, if it went up to 128G. Everything else about these seems to be a great balance of performance vs. usability - but yes, the storage size is really a problem when you consider the new HD features and video editing.
You do realize that a typical Blu-Ray disk with 1080P video takes up anywhere from 17-35 GB on average right? That's with 6 channel discrete HD Audio as well. 720p with mono will take far less.
Yeah, it MAY be revolutionary. What Apple is doing better than the rest is how they integrate the features. Nobody seems to get that until they start using it and then the new apps flow in.
It doesn't come out like a new feature -- it comes out like a new ability that affects the gestalt. All fan-boy nonsense aside, those few "cool" new features are going to be combined in new applications.
The HD video editing for iMovie on the iOS and the accelerometer and better antennae and gyro -- that means you can use this device perhaps for Surveying or as a contractor. The iPad is on its way to revolutionizing hospitals with a device that can speak to everything and be used to check your blood glucose.
It's an intermediary -- but I"m really waiting for the avalanche of USB-enabled sensor probes. This really should be the Star Trek tricorder.
"When Jobs turned to Scott Forstall, senior vice president for iPhone software, for ideas, someone in the audience suggested they try the Verizon network."
I would have paid to hear that
Yeah, but I'd rather if the 576 idiots in the audience with their own wireless base stations would stop crowding the airwaves so they don't disappoint everyone by screwing with the demos.
I have not yet got a clear picture of how this is planned to work.
1) Will the ad banners appear on the iPhone screen only when you use an app, or also when you use the phone without using an app?
2) And further: How often will an ad banner be presented on the screen, and
3) for how long time (if you not cut it off by clicking on it once and then again to make it disappear)?
4) And will its location on the screen disturb your own activity on and with the screeen?
5) And at last: How big and in what format will the ad appear?
Even though I can understand the need for such ads, I must say there are possible serious downsides with them, too. And perhaps this will not turn out as a good idea for the users, at the end of the day. I am afraid many users will take a negative attitude towards such an (for many users: unwelcome and not asked for) intrusion on the screen.
Oh I'm impressed. I haven't seen the gyro yet. I'm very satisfied with the update. I wasn't impressed with the 3GS over the 3G, but I'm super impressed with the IP4 over the 3GS.
I'm impressed too, but as someone who has had all three, the 3G-->3GS jump was the most significant of the two jumps when actual usefulness of the upgrades is the question.
Another thing to consider is with a 960 by 640 pixel display, the entire screen has 614,400 pixels each with the ability to display only one of the 16 million rgb values. Since human vision does not use rgb it is difficult to compare it to a digital display. The mind interprets colors outside of the rgb color gamut. So in the regard to comparing the iPhone's display to human vision, aside from the resolution issue, the iPhone is also inferior, and to a measurable degree inaccurate, in its color representation.
You have to multiply that number by three, or four, if they're using a doubling of the green sites. Displaying red will give a much smaller "dot" than displaying white, or grey, or yellow, or magenta, or cyan.
There's no such thing as the "RGB" gamut. RGB can have a small gamut, or a very large gamut. Seeing detail has nothing to do with the gamut per se.
I see this phone as being far ahead of whatever's out there now. Do I see it as revolutionary? Well, yes, in a way I do.
What we've been seeing is that when Apple implements a feature, it becomes an important feature to have. It becomes used. When other companies have introduced the same features, we haven't seen that. One reason is as Jobs has said, Apple sweats the details. They get it right. Android phones have a fair amount of poorly thought out features. The OS is still wonky and crude. It's not just my opinion, but the opinion of even the reviewers in many cases, even if they liked the phone. The same thing is true of the hardware. As I said, a crappy 5 MP camera, which is what these other phones mostly have, isn't impressive. If this camera proves to be as good as it looks to be, then it will make a major difference. The same thing is true of the 720p recording. I've seen that on a couple of other phones, and it's not very good. If Apple's 5 times zoom works in movie mode, it could be spectacular, if it works the way I think it might. We can look to the 5 MP sensor for that. You only need 921,600 pixels for 720p. We've got almost 6 times that. Zooming to 5x will still leave us with more than we need. It will remain sharp throughout the entire zoom range.
This phone can actually be a substitute for the $150 and cheaper digital cameras that people still buy in large numbers. That would be revolutionary. But, even now, iPhones are the biggest contributor to Facebook pictures.
It reminds me of the 8 hour recording time that VHS has in relation to the 5 hour record time of Beta. It sucked. It really wasn't useable. This is like a lot of the features of other phones. The features exist, but they aren't good. Apple's are good. Yes, I know that Beta died out. But Apple isn't Sony, and the iPhone isn't a Beta machine.
I'm willing to bet that Apple's video calling will be used, while that of others won't. That makes that feature, on the iPhone, revolutionary.
The OS is better too. Apple now has covered the features other phones were offering in more poorly functioning fashion. 7 hours for 3G talk. What other smartphone comes close to that? The highest rated Android models all have fairly poor battery life. 40 hours music. Who else has that?
It's the totality of the package that matters. If you want to pick out a feature out here and there from other phones, that's fine. But it tells you nothing about the whole experience. And in that, this phone is revolutionary, as have the older ones been.
I see people who don't like Apple on other sites going meh about this, but that's just because it's an Apple product. I pay no attention to it.
AT&T's plans now cost less than they did. The difference may not be all that much. Sprint and T-Mobile offer slightly cheaper plans because they aren't doing that well, and have no choice.
I have not yet got a clear picture of how this is planned to work.
1) Will the ad banners appear on the iPhone screen only when you use an app, or also when you use the phone without using an app?
2) And further: How often will an ad banner be presented on the screen, and
3) for how long time (if you not cut it off by clicking on it once and then again to make it disappear)?
4) And will its location on the screen disturb your own activity on and with the screeen?
5) And at last: How big and in what format will the ad appear?
Even though I can understand the need for such ads, I must say there are possible serious downsides with them, too. And perhaps this is not a good idea for the users, at the end of the day.
1) Only in apps, as that is what iAd is specifically targeted for. To allow app designers an easier way to incorporate ads in their apps
2) Depends on the app designer
3) Depends on the app designer
4) Depends on the app designer
5) Depends on the app designer
I think you get the point. If a designer goes crazy with Ads, their app will bomb, and they will go nowhere. These things have a tendency to take care of themselves. Chances are the ads will be unobtrusive IF your app of choice decides to use them. They can't afford something that drives users away.
My son has a Flip HD which can do 2 hours of 720P video in 2 GB.
It all depends on the compression, and the type of video it's shooting. It also depends on the OS. Does it allow more than 2 GB for a single video file? That's a problem.
You would call like normal. It's just that the feature would be available if your phone was also contacted to a wifi network.
If that's true, which I suspect it is, imagine how complicated it would be to get the audio and video synced? One traveling over 3G and the other over wifi?
To answer some questions about the six axis sensors, I want to point out a current limitation of the 3 axis accelerometer. Right now the phone can pick up tilting the phone in any direction and translating the phone up and down. Currently though the accelerometers can't pick up a rotation of the phone if it stays flat. For example if you set your phone down on a table and rotate it so the home button goes from close to you to far away. The gyros will pick up this rotation where currently the accelerometers can't.
Also, gyros will allow the software to determine if the phone is being tilted or translated. Right now there isn't a way to determine if an acceleration was due to gravity, or due to the phone being translated. I would imagine for games like Monkey Ball they may be able to better sense tilt, and that playing while riding in a car would be easier.
Yeah, but I'd rather if the 576 idiots in the audience with their own wireless base stations would stop crowding the airwaves so they don't disappoint everyone by screwing with the demos.
What I'm surprised at is that they don't have a private WiFi station there just for the demos.
It all depends on the compression, and the type of video it's shooting. It also depends on the OS. Does it allow more than 2 GB for a single video file? That's a problem.
That 2GB limit is typically a limit of the underlying file system. That won't be an issue on an iPhone.
For someone who claims to teach this stuff, it honestly saddens me that you've tried to equate the cell density of the retina with the density of a display device held 10 to 12 inches away. Your nitpicking assumes you smashed the display up against your retina (of course, then you couldn't actually see the whole display). Your vision really does lose "resolution" the farther away an object is. Otherwise, we'd all be able to see the stripes on the American flag on the Moon.
Maybe you'd like to source some research that says the retina can pick out detail higher than 326 ppi at 10 inches away before making nonsensical arguments.
I mean really, is everyone really so truly saddened by this stuff?
The professor you're replying to is truly saddened at SJ's comments, as if somehow the impending pop-culture explosion of his vision science field is thrown off track by the speech. And you are "honestly" saddened by this comments? Cmon people
You do realize that a typical Blu-Ray disk with 1080P video takes up anywhere from 17-35 GB on average right? That's with 6 channel discrete HD Audio as well. 720p with mono will take far less.
That does come to mind -- sure. But you'd need a super fast video compressor-decompressor and lose a lot of quality to MASTER video in 17 Gigs.
Apple's Intermediate CODEC is good for editing video. But more or less, I'd say that in REAL WORLD terms, you need about 3X the storage space of the Time of the video on a FINAL HD CODEC. When you layer graphics you've got the source, and then you've got the rendering of the layers in a much less compressed codec.
On top of that, you MIGHT be doing something more than just video editing. My 16 Gig iPod Touch is full to the brim, and that's without ANY video editing going on. So maybe I slim it down to 8 Gigs, and then add all the newer LARGER apps that will be designed for the new HD platform...
... So, by my rough estimate -- a REAL HD video will require about a Gig a Minute -- but for people doing that home movie who can't tell a compressed SD from an HD signal -- maybe they can do an hour with 18 Gigs of free space.
Comments
Nope. I was hoping to replace three devices (phone, Palm TX and iPod) with one. Going to Android means I'll be able to reduce that to two, but the iPod won't get retired. I won't be able to go to an iPod + iPhone setup (even later) because there's only one checkbox per item in iTunes to manage what does and doesn't get synced.
See ya.
He did say that they kept the pixel size of the camera sensor the same and added a backlighting feature to help add more photons to the higher pixel density. These are the little things necessary with increased pixel density to actually take a better image.
Other phone manufacturers increase megapixels by shrinking pixels.
Yes. And there are several methods to do that. The backlit sensor is a major feature. Sony first came out with these for their D-SLR's. People don't understand how a sensor works. The circuits are actually ABOVE the sensing sites. This technology reverses the chip, making it more sensitive, as the light doesn't have to go through those layers.
Apple may be using a slightly larger chip as well. I believe I read that about this chip. In addition, Canon, and others, are making chips with less dead space between the sensing sites, allowing the sites to be larger.
>> I think they REALLY need a portable storage system that connects to the dock port or something. Here's the real kicker -- how many MINUTES of HD video are you really going to edit with a max of 32G? Maybe 15?
My son has a Flip HD which can do 2 hours of 720P video in 2 GB.
>> I think they REALLY need a portable storage system that connects to the dock port or something. Here's the real kicker -- how many MINUTES of HD video are you really going to edit with a max of 32G? Maybe 15?
Storage space is as important to video editing as a good antenna and battery life are to a phone. So I'd even go with a thicker phone myself, if it went up to 128G. Everything else about these seems to be a great balance of performance vs. usability - but yes, the storage size is really a problem when you consider the new HD features and video editing.
You do realize that a typical Blu-Ray disk with 1080P video takes up anywhere from 17-35 GB on average right? That's with 6 channel discrete HD Audio as well. 720p with mono will take far less.
Yeah, it MAY be revolutionary. What Apple is doing better than the rest is how they integrate the features. Nobody seems to get that until they start using it and then the new apps flow in.
It doesn't come out like a new feature -- it comes out like a new ability that affects the gestalt. All fan-boy nonsense aside, those few "cool" new features are going to be combined in new applications.
The HD video editing for iMovie on the iOS and the accelerometer and better antennae and gyro -- that means you can use this device perhaps for Surveying or as a contractor. The iPad is on its way to revolutionizing hospitals with a device that can speak to everything and be used to check your blood glucose.
It's an intermediary -- but I"m really waiting for the avalanche of USB-enabled sensor probes. This really should be the Star Trek tricorder.
"When Jobs turned to Scott Forstall, senior vice president for iPhone software, for ideas, someone in the audience suggested they try the Verizon network."
I would have paid to hear that
Yeah, but I'd rather if the 576 idiots in the audience with their own wireless base stations would stop crowding the airwaves so they don't disappoint everyone by screwing with the demos.
1) Will the ad banners appear on the iPhone screen only when you use an app, or also when you use the phone without using an app?
2) And further: How often will an ad banner be presented on the screen, and
3) for how long time (if you not cut it off by clicking on it once and then again to make it disappear)?
4) And will its location on the screen disturb your own activity on and with the screeen?
5) And at last: How big and in what format will the ad appear?
Even though I can understand the need for such ads, I must say there are possible serious downsides with them, too. And perhaps this will not turn out as a good idea for the users, at the end of the day. I am afraid many users will take a negative attitude towards such an (for many users: unwelcome and not asked for) intrusion on the screen.
Oh I'm impressed. I haven't seen the gyro yet. I'm very satisfied with the update. I wasn't impressed with the 3GS over the 3G, but I'm super impressed with the IP4 over the 3GS.
I'm impressed too, but as someone who has had all three, the 3G-->3GS jump was the most significant of the two jumps when actual usefulness of the upgrades is the question.
Another thing to consider is with a 960 by 640 pixel display, the entire screen has 614,400 pixels each with the ability to display only one of the 16 million rgb values. Since human vision does not use rgb it is difficult to compare it to a digital display. The mind interprets colors outside of the rgb color gamut. So in the regard to comparing the iPhone's display to human vision, aside from the resolution issue, the iPhone is also inferior, and to a measurable degree inaccurate, in its color representation.
You have to multiply that number by three, or four, if they're using a doubling of the green sites. Displaying red will give a much smaller "dot" than displaying white, or grey, or yellow, or magenta, or cyan.
There's no such thing as the "RGB" gamut. RGB can have a small gamut, or a very large gamut. Seeing detail has nothing to do with the gamut per se.
I see this phone as being far ahead of whatever's out there now. Do I see it as revolutionary? Well, yes, in a way I do.
What we've been seeing is that when Apple implements a feature, it becomes an important feature to have. It becomes used. When other companies have introduced the same features, we haven't seen that. One reason is as Jobs has said, Apple sweats the details. They get it right. Android phones have a fair amount of poorly thought out features. The OS is still wonky and crude. It's not just my opinion, but the opinion of even the reviewers in many cases, even if they liked the phone. The same thing is true of the hardware. As I said, a crappy 5 MP camera, which is what these other phones mostly have, isn't impressive. If this camera proves to be as good as it looks to be, then it will make a major difference. The same thing is true of the 720p recording. I've seen that on a couple of other phones, and it's not very good. If Apple's 5 times zoom works in movie mode, it could be spectacular, if it works the way I think it might. We can look to the 5 MP sensor for that. You only need 921,600 pixels for 720p. We've got almost 6 times that. Zooming to 5x will still leave us with more than we need. It will remain sharp throughout the entire zoom range.
This phone can actually be a substitute for the $150 and cheaper digital cameras that people still buy in large numbers. That would be revolutionary. But, even now, iPhones are the biggest contributor to Facebook pictures.
It reminds me of the 8 hour recording time that VHS has in relation to the 5 hour record time of Beta. It sucked. It really wasn't useable. This is like a lot of the features of other phones. The features exist, but they aren't good. Apple's are good. Yes, I know that Beta died out. But Apple isn't Sony, and the iPhone isn't a Beta machine.
I'm willing to bet that Apple's video calling will be used, while that of others won't. That makes that feature, on the iPhone, revolutionary.
The OS is better too. Apple now has covered the features other phones were offering in more poorly functioning fashion. 7 hours for 3G talk. What other smartphone comes close to that? The highest rated Android models all have fairly poor battery life. 40 hours music. Who else has that?
It's the totality of the package that matters. If you want to pick out a feature out here and there from other phones, that's fine. But it tells you nothing about the whole experience. And in that, this phone is revolutionary, as have the older ones been.
I see people who don't like Apple on other sites going meh about this, but that's just because it's an Apple product. I pay no attention to it.
AT&T's plans now cost less than they did. The difference may not be all that much. Sprint and T-Mobile offer slightly cheaper plans because they aren't doing that well, and have no choice.
Beautifully stated.
I have not yet got a clear picture of how this is planned to work.
1) Will the ad banners appear on the iPhone screen only when you use an app, or also when you use the phone without using an app?
2) And further: How often will an ad banner be presented on the screen, and
3) for how long time (if you not cut it off by clicking on it once and then again to make it disappear)?
4) And will its location on the screen disturb your own activity on and with the screeen?
5) And at last: How big and in what format will the ad appear?
Even though I can understand the need for such ads, I must say there are possible serious downsides with them, too. And perhaps this is not a good idea for the users, at the end of the day.
1) Only in apps, as that is what iAd is specifically targeted for. To allow app designers an easier way to incorporate ads in their apps
2) Depends on the app designer
3) Depends on the app designer
4) Depends on the app designer
5) Depends on the app designer
I think you get the point. If a designer goes crazy with Ads, their app will bomb, and they will go nowhere. These things have a tendency to take care of themselves. Chances are the ads will be unobtrusive IF your app of choice decides to use them. They can't afford something that drives users away.
My son has a Flip HD which can do 2 hours of 720P video in 2 GB.
It all depends on the compression, and the type of video it's shooting. It also depends on the OS. Does it allow more than 2 GB for a single video file? That's a problem.
You would call like normal. It's just that the feature would be available if your phone was also contacted to a wifi network.
If that's true, which I suspect it is, imagine how complicated it would be to get the audio and video synced? One traveling over 3G and the other over wifi?
Also, gyros will allow the software to determine if the phone is being tilted or translated. Right now there isn't a way to determine if an acceleration was due to gravity, or due to the phone being translated. I would imagine for games like Monkey Ball they may be able to better sense tilt, and that playing while riding in a car would be easier.
Yeah, but I'd rather if the 576 idiots in the audience with their own wireless base stations would stop crowding the airwaves so they don't disappoint everyone by screwing with the demos.
What I'm surprised at is that they don't have a private WiFi station there just for the demos.
It all depends on the compression, and the type of video it's shooting. It also depends on the OS. Does it allow more than 2 GB for a single video file? That's a problem.
That 2GB limit is typically a limit of the underlying file system. That won't be an issue on an iPhone.
For someone who claims to teach this stuff, it honestly saddens me that you've tried to equate the cell density of the retina with the density of a display device held 10 to 12 inches away. Your nitpicking assumes you smashed the display up against your retina (of course, then you couldn't actually see the whole display). Your vision really does lose "resolution" the farther away an object is. Otherwise, we'd all be able to see the stripes on the American flag on the Moon.
Maybe you'd like to source some research that says the retina can pick out detail higher than 326 ppi at 10 inches away before making nonsensical arguments.
I mean really, is everyone really so truly saddened by this stuff?
The professor you're replying to is truly saddened at SJ's comments, as if somehow the impending pop-culture explosion of his vision science field is thrown off track by the speech. And you are "honestly" saddened by this comments? Cmon people
You do realize that a typical Blu-Ray disk with 1080P video takes up anywhere from 17-35 GB on average right? That's with 6 channel discrete HD Audio as well. 720p with mono will take far less.
That does come to mind -- sure. But you'd need a super fast video compressor-decompressor and lose a lot of quality to MASTER video in 17 Gigs.
Apple's Intermediate CODEC is good for editing video. But more or less, I'd say that in REAL WORLD terms, you need about 3X the storage space of the Time of the video on a FINAL HD CODEC. When you layer graphics you've got the source, and then you've got the rendering of the layers in a much less compressed codec.
On top of that, you MIGHT be doing something more than just video editing. My 16 Gig iPod Touch is full to the brim, and that's without ANY video editing going on. So maybe I slim it down to 8 Gigs, and then add all the newer LARGER apps that will be designed for the new HD platform...
... So, by my rough estimate -- a REAL HD video will require about a Gig a Minute -- but for people doing that home movie who can't tell a compressed SD from an HD signal -- maybe they can do an hour with 18 Gigs of free space.
What I'm surprised at is that they don't have a private WiFi station there just for the demos.
I'm sure they did, but with a limited number of WiFi channels, I would imagine 570 networks just used up all the spectrum.
That 2GB limit is typically a limit of the underlying file system. That won't be an issue on an iPhone.
I know, I'm talking about the Flip cameras and point and shoot cameras that also do video.