Hopefully, Qualcomm has a firmware load for each of these modes and the SAME SKU will be able to be activated as in either mode. That would be very APPLE and keep the costs down for Apple and the consumer.
So Steve was quite evil when he said that he was happy with the deal. I guess he was happy that intel was spending money on a dud, and would still be shut out of iPhone/iPad business even after spending some cash.
Hopefully, Qualcomm has a firmware load for each of these modes and the SAME SKU will be able to be activated as in either mode. That would be very APPLE and keep the costs down for Apple and the consumer.
If worldmode phones were a real benefit to companies there would probably be a lot more focus on these phones, but as it stands now they are few and far between with too many cons compared to pros to discuss here.
To put simply, there are cost, size, power and frequency band hurdles to overcome, and the only one Apple an easily tackle compared to all the other mobile vendors is cost since their economy of sale on a premium smartphone model is so substanial.
If Apple goes with QCOM CDMA chipset for the Verizon phones, they would have to pay an average of 5.5% royalties... about $30/phone. No royalties to the UMTS group if the phone has no 3G/UMTS features. That is a savings compared to the $40-50/phone Apple pays now to the UMTS group.
Going with a world phone would increase costs for hardware as other components would change too... plus royalties. It would sense only for the Verizon, Sprint and other CDMA carriers, in order to gain incremental $$$. Not as a global world phone... since CDMA is small market now worldwide.
If Apple goes with QCOM CDMA chipset for the Verizon phones, they would have to pay an average of 5.5% royalties... about $30/phone. No royalties to the UMTS group if the phone has no 3G/UMTS features. That is a savings compared to the $40-50/phone Apple pays now to the UMTS group.
Going with a world phone would increase costs for hardware as other components would change too... plus royalties. It would sense only for the Verizon, Sprint and other CDMA carriers, in order to gain incremental $$$. Not as a global world phone... since CDMA is small market now worldwide.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism;
If worldmode phones were a real benefit to companies there would probably be a lot more focus on these phones, but as it stands now they are few and far between with too many cons compared to pros to discuss here.
To put simply, there are cost, size, power and frequency band hurdles to overcome, and the only one Apple an easily tackle compared to all the other mobile vendors is cost since their economy of sale on a premium smartphone model is so substanial.
I think too that it is unlikely there will be a super jumbo world iPhone 5. There would simply be a separate CDMA version. Or CDMA+4G(?)...
The only large company I can see Apple buying is Cortex-ARM, and only to prevent Intel from getting their hands on it. Why? So Intel doesn't muck up the ARM intellectual property in the same way that Microsoft bungled up the Danger OS, and some are worried that HP will.
You mean ARM Holdings? Actually Apple was part of the creation of ARM and ARM Holdings and then sold off its stock after Jobs return
........ But, that's assuming we're talking about what they have out that we know of. For all we know, they may have a smaller one.
Apple could easily build a phone to accomodate the chipset. I find it difficult to believe that they are wedded to the current form. In fact it is in Apples best interests to bring new designs to the market. Besides us older folks like bigger screens and it really doesn't take much to make a difference. If you spread the same number of pixels out over a screen that is maybe a half inch longer and 3/8" higher (whatever to maintain the current ratio) everything becomes bigger on screen without a significant drop in quality. No software mods are required.
Plus a bigger iPhone offeres up the possibilities of more flash, an SD slot or a larger battery. With careful engineering the phone would only get wider, that is bigger in the short dimension.
All this talk about chips is inyeresting but I'm very surprised that people who understand these issues would think that iPhone dimensions are set in stone.
Apple could easily build a phone to accomodate the chipset. I find it difficult to believe that they are wedded to the current form. In fact it is in Apples best interests to bring new designs to the market. Besides us older folks like bigger screens and it really doesn't take much to make a difference. If you spread the same number of pixels out over a screen that is maybe a half inch longer and 3/8" higher (whatever to maintain the current ratio) everything becomes bigger on screen without a significant drop in quality. No software mods are required.
Plus a bigger iPhone offeres up the possibilities of more flash, an SD slot or a larger battery. With careful engineering the phone would only get wider, that is bigger in the short dimension.
All this talk about chips is inyeresting but I'm very surprised that people who understand these issues would think that iPhone dimensions are set in stone.
I think it?s unrealistic to think Apple could alter the iPhone?s display size and/ratio without also creating a new UI for it. This is Apple we?re talking about, not a vendor using Android OS.
Case in point, this is the company that created a new font for the iPhone 4?s display that didn?t alter the ratio or increase the display size, only increased the number of pixels. Helvetica is perfectly fine on the iPhone 4 but they wanted a new font for the display, so I can?t imagine Apple being okay with everything being larger and more spread out on a larger display. It?s just not what Apple does.
If worldmode phones were a real benefit to companies there would probably be a lot more focus on these phones, but as it stands now they are few and far between with too many cons compared to pros to discuss here.
For some companies or departments there of it could be huge. It would mean connectivity anywhere in the world with cell phone service. By the way, yes there are places with no service at all.
The cons are that such a phone doesn't exist right at the moment. The other thing is the need for unlocked phones and decent international plans. Even today it takes planning ahead if a company expects to have people traveling internationally.
Quote:
To put simply, there are cost, size, power and frequency band hurdles to overcome,
Absolutely correct, but remember the same technology shrinks that gave Apple their A4 chip also apply to the other chips in a cell phone. Especially when many of those chips contain embedded ARM processors to begin with. So what might have been expensive a year or two ago could be very possible today. Note expensive could mean power, $$$$ or board realestate.
Quote:
and the only one Apple an easily tackle compared to all the other mobile vendors is cost since their economy of sale on a premium smartphone model is so substanial.
Nope technology improvements will eventually move most of the baseband processing right onto the main SoC. In fact Qualcom, I believe, once had a pic on their site showing such an arraingement. The main processor in this case was a dual core chip with one core dedicated to a realtime kernel and baseband processing.
I have to believe that Apples long term goal is to pull as much technology as possible into their SoC. Especially considering that process shrinks will give them much more room than they will need even for a quad core. One must remember that ARM cores are extremely small, it would not take much effort to put one on die for baseband processing or other chores. A4 is a very good first effort, but frankly it is just a start, I'm certain that Apple is close to an even more capable processor that will simply be one step towards a very capable chip for cell phones, iPads and the like. So Apple is tackling a lot more than just volume here, they are engineering a future built on ARM technology.
Besides us older folks like bigger screens and it really doesn't take much to make a difference.
.......
All this talk about chips is inyeresting but I'm very surprised that people who understand these issues would think that iPhone dimensions are set in stone.
On paper, that sounds fine. However, a lot of apps and games have been designed to work specifically with the standardized 3.5" screen. Changing the screen size may mess things up for them. But who knows; if Apple makes two iPad versions (a 7" and a 9"), then who knows where my argument will go.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluedalmatian
You mean ARM Holdings? Actually Apple was part of the creation of ARM and ARM Holdings and then sold off its stock after Jobs return
Yes, that ARM. I can't blame Apple for dumping ARM when it did; no one could have known where the technology would have gone. It would seem stupid to the layman, though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvidia2008
I think too that it is unlikely there will be a super jumbo world iPhone 5. There would simply be a separate CDMA version. Or CDMA+4G(?)...
If you mean Sprint 4G: WiMax is completely unrelated to LTE. Apple only wants to develop for established technology. WiMax isn't it, yet. It may never be. If you mean Verizon 4G/LTE, I figure Apple will wait until chipsets get more power-efficient than they are, now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AjitMD
If Apple goes with QCOM CDMA chipset for the Verizon phones, they would have to pay an average of 5.5% royalties... about $30/phone. No royalties to the UMTS group if the phone has no 3G/UMTS features. That is a savings compared to the $40-50/phone Apple pays now to the UMTS group.
Going with a world phone would increase costs for hardware as other components would change too... plus royalties. It would sense only for the Verizon, Sprint and other CDMA carriers, in order to gain incremental $$$. Not as a global world phone... since CDMA is small market now worldwide.
The fact that UMTS+GSM is a global technology makes it understandable that no CDMA+UMTS phone would be made for UMTS carriers.
As for CDMA carriers, business travelers become a factor; they are quite the iPhone customer. The only business travelers who wouldn't have any issues with a CDMA-only device are those that stay within nations that have CDMA systems. That's basically central Asia, the Americas, some parts of eastern Europe, Israel, and a few African nations. Anywhere else, and a form of GSM becomes a necessity; 2100 MHz UMTS would be the best way to do that.
On the other hand, it's possible that demand for CDMA iPhones would be so high, every CDMA iPhone would be sold just fine to those who won't ever stray out of CDMA territory. And how many people interested in buying CDMA iPhones would regularly travel internationally, anyway? Five percent? Ten percent? So those factors, along with the royalty issues, would make it logical to not load any UMTS into a CDMA iPhone.
However, I would think that Steve would try to cover his bases here, just in case he'd need to. Or put it this way: Steve's willing to use IPS displays when he doesn't have to, and not doing it would pad profit margins. Why does he use them, then? Purely because he wants to make the user experience as good as it can be.
I think it?s unrealistic to think Apple could alter the iPhone?s display size and/ratio without also creating a new UI for it. This is Apple we?re talking about, not a vendor using Android OS.
I'm not talking about altering the ratio, rather just making the screen slightly bigger to accomodate more stuff inside. This in response to the idea that a world phone would not have room for the hardware. That might very well be the case for the current iPhone but i don't think that size is engraved in stone at Apple.
And no this is not a new UI and niether is a UI new if you add a new font to it. IPhone 4's UI is the same as the old phones it is just running on a higher resolution display.
Quote:
Case in point, this is the company that created a new font for the iPhone 4?s display that didn?t alter the ratio or increase the display size, only increased the number of pixels. Helvetica is perfectly fine on the iPhone 4 but they wanted a new font for the display, so I can?t imagine Apple being okay with everything being larger and more spread out on a larger display. It?s just not what Apple does.
First off; we need to discount this idea that the new font was created soley to support the new display. Apple could have had any number of reasons for including a new font.
Second; looking bigger is exactly what I want as a customer. The modest size increases we are talking about here would still leave us with very high resolution screens. In the end the text might be a few thousands of an inch bigger, pics would actually look better in my opinion and absolutely nothing would change API wise nor would any apps have to change. Frankly it would be like going from a 17" to an 18" screen on the desktop back in the day when the pixel count would have been the same. Everything is just a bit bigger.
In a nut shell if there is a need for more room, in iPhone, to accomodate a different chipset it isn't a problem. That is my point. Just make everything slightly bigger. We are only talking about fractions of an inch here to give you the area needed. The fact that some of us would like a bigger screen is just another positive.
As to what Apple does and what makes sense please look at the iPod lineup. I think your imagination runs away here, apple does what a given technology will allow them to do at any point in time. I'm sure if it was possible Apple would dispense with the screen altogether and pump the image right into our visual cortex. That tech is for tomorrow but these days screens rule.
I'm not talking about altering the ratio, rather just making the screen slightly bigger to accomodate more stuff inside. This in response to the idea that a world phone would not have room for the hardware. That might very well be the case for the current iPhone but i don't think that size is engraved in stone at Apple.
And no this is not a new UI and niether is a UI new if you add a new font to it. IPhone 4's UI is the same as the old phones it is just running on a higher resolution display.
First off; we need to discount this idea that the new font was created soley to support the new display. Apple could have had any number of reasons for including a new font.
Second; looking bigger is exactly what I want as a customer. The modest size increases we are talking about here would still leave us with very high resolution screens. In the end the text might be a few thousands of an inch bigger, pics would actually look better in my opinion and absolutely nothing would change API wise nor would any apps have to change. Frankly it would be like going from a 17" to an 18" screen on the desktop back in the day when the pixel count would have been the same. Everything is just a bit bigger.
In a nut shell if there is a need for more room, in iPhone, to accomodate a different chipset it isn't a problem. That is my point. Just make everything slightly bigger. We are only talking about fractions of an inch here to give you the area needed. The fact that some of us would like a bigger screen is just another positive.
As to what Apple does and what makes sense please look at the iPod lineup. I think your imagination runs away here, apple does what a given technology will allow them to do at any point in time. I'm sure if it was possible Apple would dispense with the screen altogether and pump the image right into our visual cortex. That tech is for tomorrow but these days screens rule.
There is absolutely no precedence for Apple weakening their iOS UI to accommodate those who want larger buttons, and plenty of things to point to that show Apple cares about the UI in their iOS devices. You’ve created no viable argument that they would destroy this part of their business model to copy Android phones with larger displays.
On top of that Apple could allow for more internal space by not making their devices thinner and thinner, but this is, again, is something that has plenty of precedence within Apple, and not just win iOS-based devices.
BTW, I have yet to see a real “world mode” phone. Every one that supports GSM and CDMA has been huge battery sucking device that does not support any GSM anything other than Japan and Europe. It doesn’t matter if you have CDMA/GSM/CDMA2000/WCDMA/LTE chips if you don’t support all the radio needed for the world. In other words, Apple would have add even more chips to support all the other networks they current support than Verizon’s “world mode” phones are ignoring.
Apple doesn’t have a background of making these TARDIS radio chips. Apple is just a company and they still have to work within the confined of the physical universe. They can use more money to engineer smaller devices but that also has its limits.
PS: Didn’t Helvetica Neue arrive for the iPhone 4, and isn’t it still Helvetica Neue for only the iOS 4.x devices with a Retina Display? If so, then how you can say that Helvetica Neue was not used because of the new display if it’s only used in the devices with the new display? What other reasons could there be?
On paper, that sounds fine. However, a lot of apps and games have been designed to work specifically with the standardized 3.5" screen. Changing the screen size may mess things up for them. But who knows; if Apple makes two iPad versions (a 7" and a 9"), then who knows where my argument will go.
I thought I was pretty clear in the original post but obviously people aren't reading for content here. I said a bigger screen stuffed into a slightly large iPhone the ration and pixel count can remain the same. There is zero impact on developers this way. Unless of course developers didn't follow Apples guidelines, frankly screw them as I'm tired of hearing about developers that can't read.
Quote:
Yes, that ARM. I can't blame Apple for dumping ARM when it did; no one could have known where the technology would have gone. It would seem stupid to the layman, though.
It wasn't a case of dumping ARM but rather selling stock to help keep Apple afloat. For the most part ARM has been very successful with their approach to processor design. It likely wasn't easy for Apple to sell that stock as they where directly involved in the creation of ARM.
Quote:
If you mean Sprint 4G: WiMax is completely unrelated to LTE. Apple only wants to develop for established technology. WiMax isn't it, yet. It may never be. If you mean Verizon 4G/LTE, I figure Apple will wait until chipsets get more power-efficient than they are, now.
There is also no sense in delivering products when there is littke in the way of established services. Of course we are on the edge of that availability curve right now. Even the current 4G chips will be fine in something like iPad.
Quote:
The fact that UMTS+GSM is a global technology makes it understandable that no CDMA+UMTS phone would be made for UMTS carriers.
How is that?
GSM is no more global than CDMA. Besides that almost everybody is going to LTE. In the end the customer should really be the end user not the carrier, this unfortunately is where the industry is currently screwed up. Even worst is the need for congressional action. There is not a chance in hell of the current congress cleaning up the telecomunnications mess.
Quote:
As for CDMA carriers, business travelers become a factor; they are quite the iPhone customer. The only business travelers who wouldn't have any issues with a CDMA-only device are those that stay within nations that have CDMA systems. That's basically central Asia, the Americas, some parts of eastern Europe, Israel, and a few African nations. Anywhere else, and a form of GSM becomes a necessity; 2100 MHz UMTS would be the best way to do that.
So you are confirming the need for a flexible cell phone? Mind you the demand isn't huge but these are the same people that would be willing to pay more for that flexibility.
Quote:
On the other hand, it's possible that demand for CDMA iPhones would be so high, every CDMA iPhone would be sold just fine to those who won't ever stray out of CDMA territory.
That is silly as we all know that CDMA phones sell just fine now.
Quote:
And how many people interested in buying CDMA iPhones would regularly travel internationally, anyway? Five percent? Ten percent? So those factors, along with the royalty issues, would make it logical to not load any UMTS into a CDMA iPhone.
Nope! For the people wanting that flexibility they would gladly pay for it. So what if the phone costs $50 extra. Besides the big problem isn't the flexibility of the radio, but rather the locked nature of the phone. Unless you have a really good international calling plan, you need an unlocked phone for long term international deployment.
Quote:
However, I would think that Steve would try to cover his bases here, just in case he'd need to. Or put it this way: Steve's willing to use IPS displays when he doesn't have to, and not doing it would pad profit margins.
I have no idea what you are trying to say above.
Steve most likely went to IPS because just about every cell phone out there had outclassed the old iPhones screen. In a way by going with this screen, Apple eliminated screens as a competitive factor. After all what can the competition do, say they have higher resolution dispkays but you can't see it?
Quote:
Why does he use them, then? Purely because he wants to make the user experience as good as it can be.
More likely it wants to be able to compete on his terms. With the current iPhone 4 screen the competition can't effectively sell higher resolution screens. All Apple simply has to say is that you can't see any better and look at all these other features we have. So Apple doesn't have to worry about the screen for awhile and can direct the marketing machine at points that the competition can't quickly address.
In many ways iPhone 4 is Apple at its best, they lead in directions others have a hard time following.
I thought I was pretty clear in the original post but obviously people aren't reading for content here. I said a bigger screen stuffed into a slightly large iPhone the ration and pixel count can remain the same. There is zero impact on developers this way. Unless of course developers didn't follow Apples guidelines, frankly screw them as I'm tired of hearing about developers that can't read.
[…]
You’re not thinking this through from anyone’s PoV, especially not Apple’s which is the only one that really matters here.
There is absolutely no precedence for Apple weakening their iOS UI to accommodate those who want larger buttons, and plenty of things to point to that show Apple cares about the UI in their iOS devices. You?ve created no viable argument that they would destroy this part of their business model to copy Android phones with larger displays.
I'm not sure if I'm communicating poorly here ir what but I'm very sure I never said copy Android phones. The fact is Apple could make a slightly larger phone and by extendion a slightly larger screen with zero problem. With the new Retina technology you are only talking about adding a couple thousands of an inch between pixels, at this resolution people would not see a difference.
It would not harm the user interface one bit, it is rediculous to imply it would.
Quote:
On top of that Apple could allow for more internal space by not making their devices thinner and thinner, but this is, again, is something that has plenty of precedence within Apple, and not just win iOS-based devices.
They could but honestly which would you prefer a thinner but longer iPhone or a thicker and shorter one? Most people would go for the slightly longer and thinner model as it would go in more pockets without trouble.
Quote:
BTW, I have yet to see a real ?world mode? phone. Every one that supports GSM and CDMA has been huge battery sucking device that does not support any GSM anything other than Japan and Europe. It doesn?t matter if you have CDMA/GSM/CDMA2000/WCDMA/LTE chips if you don?t support all the radio needed for the world. In other words, Apple would have add even more chips to support all the other networks they current support than Verizon?s ?world mode? phones are ignoring.
Exactly! Current solutions suck, nobody will argue with that. However that has nothing to do with what is possible. Process shrinks and technology improvements apply to everything electronic, what wasn.'t practicle yesterday can easily end up in a phone tomorrow. If that takes a slghtly larger iPhone then so be it.
Quote:
Apple doesn?t have a background of making these TARDIS radio chips. Apple is just a company and they still have to work within the confined of the physical universe. They can use more money to engineer smaller devices but that also has its limits.
Apple can't do everything itself but it can divide responsibility between itself and competent partners. As to radios there are options here that might be suitable for shrinking the electronics even more, this would include software defined radios.
Quote:
PS: Didn?t Helvetica Neue arrive for the iPhone 4, and isn?t it still Helvetica Neue for only the iOS 4.x devices with a Retina Display? If so, then how you can say that Helvetica Neue was not used because of the new display if it?s only used in the devices with the new display? What other reasons could there be?
Marketing!
Seriously Apple has to provide as many incentives as possible for people to upgrade!
As to the resolution of the font don't you think that has something to do with Truetype or PostScript? If the font is rendered from one of these two definition files then is the font really iPhone 4 only? It is a good question. Unfortunately I haven't experimented with this so I can't say for sure, the interesting question is does iPad have its own fonts?
Comments
I figure that the next-gen iPhone will have two versions:
Version one for CDMA carriers.
Quad-band 800/850/1900/2100 MHz EVDO Rev. B and Voice over Rev. A.
2100 MHz UMTS support (perhaps)
No GSM support of any kind.
Version two for UMTS carriers.
Quad-band 800/900/1800/1900 MHz GSM/GPRS/EDGE.
Six-band 800/850/900/1700/1900/2100 MHz UMTS/HSPA+
No CDMA support of any kind.
Hopefully, Qualcomm has a firmware load for each of these modes and the SAME SKU will be able to be activated as in either mode. That would be very APPLE and keep the costs down for Apple and the consumer.
the guy is in charge of a company that bats for many teams
why put your relationship with a client in jeopardy over something like this.
better to say nothing, imo.
Hopefully, Qualcomm has a firmware load for each of these modes and the SAME SKU will be able to be activated as in either mode. That would be very APPLE and keep the costs down for Apple and the consumer.
If worldmode phones were a real benefit to companies there would probably be a lot more focus on these phones, but as it stands now they are few and far between with too many cons compared to pros to discuss here.
To put simply, there are cost, size, power and frequency band hurdles to overcome, and the only one Apple an easily tackle compared to all the other mobile vendors is cost since their economy of sale on a premium smartphone model is so substanial.
Going with a world phone would increase costs for hardware as other components would change too... plus royalties. It would sense only for the Verizon, Sprint and other CDMA carriers, in order to gain incremental $$$. Not as a global world phone... since CDMA is small market now worldwide.
If Apple goes with QCOM CDMA chipset for the Verizon phones, they would have to pay an average of 5.5% royalties... about $30/phone. No royalties to the UMTS group if the phone has no 3G/UMTS features. That is a savings compared to the $40-50/phone Apple pays now to the UMTS group.
Going with a world phone would increase costs for hardware as other components would change too... plus royalties. It would sense only for the Verizon, Sprint and other CDMA carriers, in order to gain incremental $$$. Not as a global world phone... since CDMA is small market now worldwide.
If worldmode phones were a real benefit to companies there would probably be a lot more focus on these phones, but as it stands now they are few and far between with too many cons compared to pros to discuss here.
To put simply, there are cost, size, power and frequency band hurdles to overcome, and the only one Apple an easily tackle compared to all the other mobile vendors is cost since their economy of sale on a premium smartphone model is so substanial.
I think too that it is unlikely there will be a super jumbo world iPhone 5. There would simply be a separate CDMA version. Or CDMA+4G(?)...
Who cares what chip powers the baseband. The goal is to make the most reliable phone, reception wise.
Well Apple have already achieved that.
We might see Apple buy Qualcomm too.
Sure, I always buy a cow if I want milk for my coffee too.
You saw nothing coming and that will never happen.
Lol.
I was scrolling down really quick. Then saw Ireland and knew I had to read it.
The only large company I can see Apple buying is Cortex-ARM, and only to prevent Intel from getting their hands on it. Why? So Intel doesn't muck up the ARM intellectual property in the same way that Microsoft bungled up the Danger OS, and some are worried that HP will.
You mean ARM Holdings? Actually Apple was part of the creation of ARM and ARM Holdings and then sold off its stock after Jobs return
........ But, that's assuming we're talking about what they have out that we know of. For all we know, they may have a smaller one.
Apple could easily build a phone to accomodate the chipset. I find it difficult to believe that they are wedded to the current form. In fact it is in Apples best interests to bring new designs to the market. Besides us older folks like bigger screens and it really doesn't take much to make a difference. If you spread the same number of pixels out over a screen that is maybe a half inch longer and 3/8" higher (whatever to maintain the current ratio) everything becomes bigger on screen without a significant drop in quality. No software mods are required.
Plus a bigger iPhone offeres up the possibilities of more flash, an SD slot or a larger battery. With careful engineering the phone would only get wider, that is bigger in the short dimension.
All this talk about chips is inyeresting but I'm very surprised that people who understand these issues would think that iPhone dimensions are set in stone.
Dave
Apple could easily build a phone to accomodate the chipset. I find it difficult to believe that they are wedded to the current form. In fact it is in Apples best interests to bring new designs to the market. Besides us older folks like bigger screens and it really doesn't take much to make a difference. If you spread the same number of pixels out over a screen that is maybe a half inch longer and 3/8" higher (whatever to maintain the current ratio) everything becomes bigger on screen without a significant drop in quality. No software mods are required.
Plus a bigger iPhone offeres up the possibilities of more flash, an SD slot or a larger battery. With careful engineering the phone would only get wider, that is bigger in the short dimension.
All this talk about chips is inyeresting but I'm very surprised that people who understand these issues would think that iPhone dimensions are set in stone.
I think it?s unrealistic to think Apple could alter the iPhone?s display size and/ratio without also creating a new UI for it. This is Apple we?re talking about, not a vendor using Android OS.
Case in point, this is the company that created a new font for the iPhone 4?s display that didn?t alter the ratio or increase the display size, only increased the number of pixels. Helvetica is perfectly fine on the iPhone 4 but they wanted a new font for the display, so I can?t imagine Apple being okay with everything being larger and more spread out on a larger display. It?s just not what Apple does.
If worldmode phones were a real benefit to companies there would probably be a lot more focus on these phones, but as it stands now they are few and far between with too many cons compared to pros to discuss here.
For some companies or departments there of it could be huge. It would mean connectivity anywhere in the world with cell phone service. By the way, yes there are places with no service at all.
The cons are that such a phone doesn't exist right at the moment. The other thing is the need for unlocked phones and decent international plans. Even today it takes planning ahead if a company expects to have people traveling internationally.
To put simply, there are cost, size, power and frequency band hurdles to overcome,
Absolutely correct, but remember the same technology shrinks that gave Apple their A4 chip also apply to the other chips in a cell phone. Especially when many of those chips contain embedded ARM processors to begin with. So what might have been expensive a year or two ago could be very possible today. Note expensive could mean power, $$$$ or board realestate.
and the only one Apple an easily tackle compared to all the other mobile vendors is cost since their economy of sale on a premium smartphone model is so substanial.
Nope technology improvements will eventually move most of the baseband processing right onto the main SoC. In fact Qualcom, I believe, once had a pic on their site showing such an arraingement. The main processor in this case was a dual core chip with one core dedicated to a realtime kernel and baseband processing.
I have to believe that Apples long term goal is to pull as much technology as possible into their SoC. Especially considering that process shrinks will give them much more room than they will need even for a quad core. One must remember that ARM cores are extremely small, it would not take much effort to put one on die for baseband processing or other chores. A4 is a very good first effort, but frankly it is just a start, I'm certain that Apple is close to an even more capable processor that will simply be one step towards a very capable chip for cell phones, iPads and the like. So Apple is tackling a lot more than just volume here, they are engineering a future built on ARM technology.
Besides us older folks like bigger screens and it really doesn't take much to make a difference.
.......
All this talk about chips is inyeresting but I'm very surprised that people who understand these issues would think that iPhone dimensions are set in stone.
On paper, that sounds fine. However, a lot of apps and games have been designed to work specifically with the standardized 3.5" screen. Changing the screen size may mess things up for them. But who knows; if Apple makes two iPad versions (a 7" and a 9"), then who knows where my argument will go.
You mean ARM Holdings? Actually Apple was part of the creation of ARM and ARM Holdings and then sold off its stock after Jobs return
Yes, that ARM. I can't blame Apple for dumping ARM when it did; no one could have known where the technology would have gone. It would seem stupid to the layman, though.
I think too that it is unlikely there will be a super jumbo world iPhone 5. There would simply be a separate CDMA version. Or CDMA+4G(?)...
If you mean Sprint 4G: WiMax is completely unrelated to LTE. Apple only wants to develop for established technology. WiMax isn't it, yet. It may never be. If you mean Verizon 4G/LTE, I figure Apple will wait until chipsets get more power-efficient than they are, now.
If Apple goes with QCOM CDMA chipset for the Verizon phones, they would have to pay an average of 5.5% royalties... about $30/phone. No royalties to the UMTS group if the phone has no 3G/UMTS features. That is a savings compared to the $40-50/phone Apple pays now to the UMTS group.
Going with a world phone would increase costs for hardware as other components would change too... plus royalties. It would sense only for the Verizon, Sprint and other CDMA carriers, in order to gain incremental $$$. Not as a global world phone... since CDMA is small market now worldwide.
The fact that UMTS+GSM is a global technology makes it understandable that no CDMA+UMTS phone would be made for UMTS carriers.
As for CDMA carriers, business travelers become a factor; they are quite the iPhone customer. The only business travelers who wouldn't have any issues with a CDMA-only device are those that stay within nations that have CDMA systems. That's basically central Asia, the Americas, some parts of eastern Europe, Israel, and a few African nations. Anywhere else, and a form of GSM becomes a necessity; 2100 MHz UMTS would be the best way to do that.
On the other hand, it's possible that demand for CDMA iPhones would be so high, every CDMA iPhone would be sold just fine to those who won't ever stray out of CDMA territory. And how many people interested in buying CDMA iPhones would regularly travel internationally, anyway? Five percent? Ten percent? So those factors, along with the royalty issues, would make it logical to not load any UMTS into a CDMA iPhone.
However, I would think that Steve would try to cover his bases here, just in case he'd need to. Or put it this way: Steve's willing to use IPS displays when he doesn't have to, and not doing it would pad profit margins. Why does he use them, then? Purely because he wants to make the user experience as good as it can be.
I think it?s unrealistic to think Apple could alter the iPhone?s display size and/ratio without also creating a new UI for it. This is Apple we?re talking about, not a vendor using Android OS.
I'm not talking about altering the ratio, rather just making the screen slightly bigger to accomodate more stuff inside. This in response to the idea that a world phone would not have room for the hardware. That might very well be the case for the current iPhone but i don't think that size is engraved in stone at Apple.
And no this is not a new UI and niether is a UI new if you add a new font to it. IPhone 4's UI is the same as the old phones it is just running on a higher resolution display.
Case in point, this is the company that created a new font for the iPhone 4?s display that didn?t alter the ratio or increase the display size, only increased the number of pixels. Helvetica is perfectly fine on the iPhone 4 but they wanted a new font for the display, so I can?t imagine Apple being okay with everything being larger and more spread out on a larger display. It?s just not what Apple does.
First off; we need to discount this idea that the new font was created soley to support the new display. Apple could have had any number of reasons for including a new font.
Second; looking bigger is exactly what I want as a customer. The modest size increases we are talking about here would still leave us with very high resolution screens. In the end the text might be a few thousands of an inch bigger, pics would actually look better in my opinion and absolutely nothing would change API wise nor would any apps have to change. Frankly it would be like going from a 17" to an 18" screen on the desktop back in the day when the pixel count would have been the same. Everything is just a bit bigger.
In a nut shell if there is a need for more room, in iPhone, to accomodate a different chipset it isn't a problem. That is my point. Just make everything slightly bigger. We are only talking about fractions of an inch here to give you the area needed. The fact that some of us would like a bigger screen is just another positive.
As to what Apple does and what makes sense please look at the iPod lineup. I think your imagination runs away here, apple does what a given technology will allow them to do at any point in time. I'm sure if it was possible Apple would dispense with the screen altogether and pump the image right into our visual cortex. That tech is for tomorrow but these days screens rule.
I'm not talking about altering the ratio, rather just making the screen slightly bigger to accomodate more stuff inside. This in response to the idea that a world phone would not have room for the hardware. That might very well be the case for the current iPhone but i don't think that size is engraved in stone at Apple.
And no this is not a new UI and niether is a UI new if you add a new font to it. IPhone 4's UI is the same as the old phones it is just running on a higher resolution display.
First off; we need to discount this idea that the new font was created soley to support the new display. Apple could have had any number of reasons for including a new font.
Second; looking bigger is exactly what I want as a customer. The modest size increases we are talking about here would still leave us with very high resolution screens. In the end the text might be a few thousands of an inch bigger, pics would actually look better in my opinion and absolutely nothing would change API wise nor would any apps have to change. Frankly it would be like going from a 17" to an 18" screen on the desktop back in the day when the pixel count would have been the same. Everything is just a bit bigger.
In a nut shell if there is a need for more room, in iPhone, to accomodate a different chipset it isn't a problem. That is my point. Just make everything slightly bigger. We are only talking about fractions of an inch here to give you the area needed. The fact that some of us would like a bigger screen is just another positive.
As to what Apple does and what makes sense please look at the iPod lineup. I think your imagination runs away here, apple does what a given technology will allow them to do at any point in time. I'm sure if it was possible Apple would dispense with the screen altogether and pump the image right into our visual cortex. That tech is for tomorrow but these days screens rule.
There is absolutely no precedence for Apple weakening their iOS UI to accommodate those who want larger buttons, and plenty of things to point to that show Apple cares about the UI in their iOS devices. You’ve created no viable argument that they would destroy this part of their business model to copy Android phones with larger displays.
On top of that Apple could allow for more internal space by not making their devices thinner and thinner, but this is, again, is something that has plenty of precedence within Apple, and not just win iOS-based devices.
BTW, I have yet to see a real “world mode” phone. Every one that supports GSM and CDMA has been huge battery sucking device that does not support any GSM anything other than Japan and Europe. It doesn’t matter if you have CDMA/GSM/CDMA2000/WCDMA/LTE chips if you don’t support all the radio needed for the world. In other words, Apple would have add even more chips to support all the other networks they current support than Verizon’s “world mode” phones are ignoring.
Apple doesn’t have a background of making these TARDIS radio chips. Apple is just a company and they still have to work within the confined of the physical universe. They can use more money to engineer smaller devices but that also has its limits.
PS: Didn’t Helvetica Neue arrive for the iPhone 4, and isn’t it still Helvetica Neue for only the iOS 4.x devices with a Retina Display? If so, then how you can say that Helvetica Neue was not used because of the new display if it’s only used in the devices with the new display? What other reasons could there be?
On paper, that sounds fine. However, a lot of apps and games have been designed to work specifically with the standardized 3.5" screen. Changing the screen size may mess things up for them. But who knows; if Apple makes two iPad versions (a 7" and a 9"), then who knows where my argument will go.
I thought I was pretty clear in the original post but obviously people aren't reading for content here. I said a bigger screen stuffed into a slightly large iPhone the ration and pixel count can remain the same. There is zero impact on developers this way. Unless of course developers didn't follow Apples guidelines, frankly screw them as I'm tired of hearing about developers that can't read.
Yes, that ARM. I can't blame Apple for dumping ARM when it did; no one could have known where the technology would have gone. It would seem stupid to the layman, though.
It wasn't a case of dumping ARM but rather selling stock to help keep Apple afloat. For the most part ARM has been very successful with their approach to processor design. It likely wasn't easy for Apple to sell that stock as they where directly involved in the creation of ARM.
If you mean Sprint 4G: WiMax is completely unrelated to LTE. Apple only wants to develop for established technology. WiMax isn't it, yet. It may never be. If you mean Verizon 4G/LTE, I figure Apple will wait until chipsets get more power-efficient than they are, now.
There is also no sense in delivering products when there is littke in the way of established services. Of course we are on the edge of that availability curve right now. Even the current 4G chips will be fine in something like iPad.
The fact that UMTS+GSM is a global technology makes it understandable that no CDMA+UMTS phone would be made for UMTS carriers.
How is that?
GSM is no more global than CDMA. Besides that almost everybody is going to LTE. In the end the customer should really be the end user not the carrier, this unfortunately is where the industry is currently screwed up. Even worst is the need for congressional action. There is not a chance in hell of the current congress cleaning up the telecomunnications mess.
As for CDMA carriers, business travelers become a factor; they are quite the iPhone customer. The only business travelers who wouldn't have any issues with a CDMA-only device are those that stay within nations that have CDMA systems. That's basically central Asia, the Americas, some parts of eastern Europe, Israel, and a few African nations. Anywhere else, and a form of GSM becomes a necessity; 2100 MHz UMTS would be the best way to do that.
So you are confirming the need for a flexible cell phone? Mind you the demand isn't huge but these are the same people that would be willing to pay more for that flexibility.
On the other hand, it's possible that demand for CDMA iPhones would be so high, every CDMA iPhone would be sold just fine to those who won't ever stray out of CDMA territory.
That is silly as we all know that CDMA phones sell just fine now.
And how many people interested in buying CDMA iPhones would regularly travel internationally, anyway? Five percent? Ten percent? So those factors, along with the royalty issues, would make it logical to not load any UMTS into a CDMA iPhone.
Nope! For the people wanting that flexibility they would gladly pay for it. So what if the phone costs $50 extra. Besides the big problem isn't the flexibility of the radio, but rather the locked nature of the phone. Unless you have a really good international calling plan, you need an unlocked phone for long term international deployment.
However, I would think that Steve would try to cover his bases here, just in case he'd need to. Or put it this way: Steve's willing to use IPS displays when he doesn't have to, and not doing it would pad profit margins.
I have no idea what you are trying to say above.
Steve most likely went to IPS because just about every cell phone out there had outclassed the old iPhones screen. In a way by going with this screen, Apple eliminated screens as a competitive factor. After all what can the competition do, say they have higher resolution dispkays but you can't see it?
Why does he use them, then? Purely because he wants to make the user experience as good as it can be.
More likely it wants to be able to compete on his terms. With the current iPhone 4 screen the competition can't effectively sell higher resolution screens. All Apple simply has to say is that you can't see any better and look at all these other features we have. So Apple doesn't have to worry about the screen for awhile and can direct the marketing machine at points that the competition can't quickly address.
In many ways iPhone 4 is Apple at its best, they lead in directions others have a hard time following.
I thought I was pretty clear in the original post but obviously people aren't reading for content here. I said a bigger screen stuffed into a slightly large iPhone the ration and pixel count can remain the same. There is zero impact on developers this way. Unless of course developers didn't follow Apples guidelines, frankly screw them as I'm tired of hearing about developers that can't read.
[…]
You’re not thinking this through from anyone’s PoV, especially not Apple’s which is the only one that really matters here.
There is absolutely no precedence for Apple weakening their iOS UI to accommodate those who want larger buttons, and plenty of things to point to that show Apple cares about the UI in their iOS devices. You?ve created no viable argument that they would destroy this part of their business model to copy Android phones with larger displays.
I'm not sure if I'm communicating poorly here ir what but I'm very sure I never said copy Android phones. The fact is Apple could make a slightly larger phone and by extendion a slightly larger screen with zero problem. With the new Retina technology you are only talking about adding a couple thousands of an inch between pixels, at this resolution people would not see a difference.
It would not harm the user interface one bit, it is rediculous to imply it would.
On top of that Apple could allow for more internal space by not making their devices thinner and thinner, but this is, again, is something that has plenty of precedence within Apple, and not just win iOS-based devices.
They could but honestly which would you prefer a thinner but longer iPhone or a thicker and shorter one? Most people would go for the slightly longer and thinner model as it would go in more pockets without trouble.
BTW, I have yet to see a real ?world mode? phone. Every one that supports GSM and CDMA has been huge battery sucking device that does not support any GSM anything other than Japan and Europe. It doesn?t matter if you have CDMA/GSM/CDMA2000/WCDMA/LTE chips if you don?t support all the radio needed for the world. In other words, Apple would have add even more chips to support all the other networks they current support than Verizon?s ?world mode? phones are ignoring.
Exactly! Current solutions suck, nobody will argue with that. However that has nothing to do with what is possible. Process shrinks and technology improvements apply to everything electronic, what wasn.'t practicle yesterday can easily end up in a phone tomorrow. If that takes a slghtly larger iPhone then so be it.
Apple doesn?t have a background of making these TARDIS radio chips. Apple is just a company and they still have to work within the confined of the physical universe. They can use more money to engineer smaller devices but that also has its limits.
Apple can't do everything itself but it can divide responsibility between itself and competent partners. As to radios there are options here that might be suitable for shrinking the electronics even more, this would include software defined radios.
PS: Didn?t Helvetica Neue arrive for the iPhone 4, and isn?t it still Helvetica Neue for only the iOS 4.x devices with a Retina Display? If so, then how you can say that Helvetica Neue was not used because of the new display if it?s only used in the devices with the new display? What other reasons could there be?
Marketing!
Seriously Apple has to provide as many incentives as possible for people to upgrade!
As to the resolution of the font don't you think that has something to do with Truetype or PostScript? If the font is rendered from one of these two definition files then is the font really iPhone 4 only? It is a good question. Unfortunately I haven't experimented with this so I can't say for sure, the interesting question is does iPad have its own fonts?
Dave