A bigger phone, I wonder what made them think of that? Innovation running wild.
Innovation is in its size and thicknes: it will stay same same as predecessor however screen size will increase dramatically, will be as thin as ligtning jack. At least based on these pics
For the last two years, expressions here of desire for a larger screen have been met with "Then buy something else." Could these images signal a degree of poetic justice in those dismissive bumwipes now being in a position of having to choose between THEIR preferred design or another brand? Of having their preferences mocked and insulted they way the small-preferring set have until now, using terms like "moron" and "clown phone?" Wouldn't that be a hilarious turnaround?
But the better man instead hopes for diversity and variety so more users can be happy.
Dude, take a chill pill. I apologize if I offended you with my joke, but come on.
I've held the opinion for years that Apple should produce multiple sizes of phone to maximize customer choice, and therefore maximize purchases. Now, I don't agree that Apple should do as Samsung does and cater to every single niche of the market with a million different phones. But a large-screen phone and a small-screen phone, and one premium and one mid-tier model of each, should be available at all times.
HOWEVER, I am still of the opinion that large-screen phones are ridiculous-looking, inelegant devices that are too large to function as effective/convenient phones and too small to be effective as tablets, and I have a very difficult time seeing myself owning one. That is my opinion. I am entitled to it. But it's only my opinion, and has no impact on whether or not a large-screen phone is the best device for you in your life. I am mocking the device, which I see as straddling the border into Tim Cook's fabled refrigerator-toaster territory. But I am not mocking you for wanting one, nor would I begrudge you getting one.
HOWEVER, I am still of the opinion that large-screen phones are ridiculous-looking, inelegant devices that are too large to function as effective/convenient phones and too small to be effective as tablets, and I have a very difficult time seeing myself owning one. That is my opinion. I am entitled to it. But it's only my opinion
However, the opposite is also true for many millions.
That's why it is insanely stupid to not make 2 different lines (screen size being the difference and maybe with the extra room they can give more room to the SOC (higher frequency) and a bigger battery), or being against the idea. It happens on every category (tablets, PCs, TVs). Let's not be annoyingly stubborn and blind to the mighty Apple (that also makes mistakes).
There's an whole half of the premium segment that it's not being addressed. That's the difference between growing net profits and 0 growth.
However, the opposite is also true for many millions.
That's why it is insanely stupid to not make 2 different lines (screen size being the difference and maybe with the extra room they can give more room to the SOC (higher frequency) and a bigger battery), or being against the idea. It happens on every category (tablets, PCs, TVs). Let's not be annoyingly stubborn and blind to the mighty Apple (that also makes mistakes).
There's an whole half of the premium segment that it's not being addressed. That's the difference between growing net profits and 0 growth.
Agree?
I wouldn't be surprised if they'd sell a ton of larger display iPhones if they'd make them. But I think there is something holding them back for a reason. Tim already said so, but without giving away any details. Maybe they would like an extra column with app icons, but don't want yet another big change for developers. Or perhaps they don't see any benefit to a larger display if all it does is scale up the screen.
Just look at the discontinuation of the 17" MBP; they released a screen with even more pixels in a smaller FF. This is what Apple is all about (well, not 'all', you know what I mean): they understand peoples wishes for the continuation of the 17" because people want to make use of the large display, having many pallets next you their main window or whatever. Yet they look at the 'problem' differently; they think that if they can still give users all the pixels they want / need, a smaller FF is better than a larger one. To which I agree; the screen on the rMBP is simply a better product than the older 17" screen.
As far as iPhones go, a larger display will sell. If their unit share sales will decline, people not buying an iPhone + iPad (mini?) but now a larger iPhone is uncertain. I simply can't make any educated guess here, as I'm not educated on the subject, merely posting my rambling.
Just look at the discontinuation of the 17" MBP; they released a screen with even more pixels in a smaller FF. This is what Apple is all about (well, not 'all', you know what I mean): they understand peoples wishes for the continuation of the 17" because people want to make use of the large display, having many pallets next you their main window or whatever. Yet they look at the 'problem' differently; they think that if they can still give users all the pixels they want / need, a smaller FF is better than a larger one. To which I agree; the screen on the rMBP is simply a better product than the older 17" screen.
No, the higher density of the Retina does not address the size issue at all. The Retina display has more pixels, but they don't do me any good from a real-estate point of view. You don't get any more windows or palettes on the screen than you would with a non-Retina 15". The Retina is equivalent to the old 1440 15", just sharper. One can scale it to different resolutions, but that just results in text that's too small to read and blurrier than a non-Retina display.
The bottom line is that a 15" Retina is not a particularly good substitute for a 17" screen. That doesn't mean Apple is bad for discontinuing it, just that it is now a vacant category. It is not filled in with the rMBP.
his renders look too much like Samsung Galaxy devices. And i agree that hell will have frozen over if Apple uses asymmetrical bezels in the next iPhone.
I would be stunned if the next iPhone will look this ugly. It looks like a bad attempt to respond to demand for bigger screen without throughout redesign the chassis and that I call LAZY design.
As you knew, Apple mentioned in the design patents against Samsung during the law suit that iPhone design has symmetrical screen spaced proportionally between top and the bottom. This purported iPhone 6 has screen shifted to the top to accommodate the extra screen estate which doesn't align with Apple design concept. So, I call this BS. Please give me a more realistically purported iPhone 6 pictures.
I would be stunned if the next iPhone will look this ugly. It looks like a bad attempt to respond to demand for bigger screen without throughout redesign the chassis and that I call LAZY design.
As you knew, Apple mentioned in the design patents against Samsung during the law suit that iPhone design has symmetrical screen spaced proportionally between top and the bottom. This purported iPhone 6 has screen shifted to the top to accommodate the extra screen estate which doesn't align with Apple design concept. So, I call this BS. Please give me a more realistically purported iPhone 6 pictures.
I agree that the screen and asymmetrical bezels don't look right, but I'm not sure what you mean by a "throughout redesign the chassis". If the the new iPhone takes design cues from the iPod touch/iPad do you consider that lazy design?
I agree that the screen and asymmetrical bezels don't look right, but I'm not sure what you mean by a "throughout redesign the chassis". If the the new iPhone takes design cues from the iPod touch/iPad do you consider that lazy design?
When I said lazy, I meant they used the same design in iPhone 5/5s and shift the screen up to make it bigger. That looks like the bandage design to respond to the demand, not thoroughly thought out. I know people will say about 4/4s to 5/5s designs...That's totally acceptable because the screen aspect changed, chassis changed and BOM also changed.
It looks legitimate to me, at least for a design model. Especially after seeing it's dimensions overlaid with an iPhone 5S:
Some points:
Sunny Dickson has a recent track record
Component quality, fit and finish is similar to other Apple device leaks
The design improves significantly on the current model without introducing many tradeoffs (except for a small increase in height).
Maintaining the same width as the iPhone 5S avoids the main drawback of larger-screened phones.
Addressing screen size gives them another reason to revisiting pixel density. 1080p (FULL HD) or higher is a big marketing point. Only slightly higher and you're at 1280-by-2272 which would allow seamless support for legacy software similar to the transition from iPhone 4 > 4S.
Display allows exactly enough room for an additional (7th) row of application icons.
Really? What about symmetrical concept that Apple always followed? Do you think Apple needs big marketing point by adding useless pixels of 1080p which adds zero benefit but drain more battery. When did Apple ever do that? Apple paid developer to create apps compatible with new screen resolution, so they don't care about legacy software transition (4/4s - 5/5s is an example). I don't believe Apple will ever go beyond retina display, so my prediction is 4.5" for the next iPhone with 720p resolution or 326 dpi. Even if they go for 4.7/4.8" screen, it won't be more than 768 x 1366 which is still 326 dpi.
I agree that the screen and asymmetrical bezels don't look right, but I'm not sure what you mean by a "throughout redesign the chassis". If the the new iPhone takes design cues from the iPod touch/iPad do you consider that lazy design?
When I said lazy, I meant they used the same design in iPhone 5/5s and shift the screen up to make it bigger. That looks like the bandage design to respond to the demand, not thoroughly thought out. I know people will say about 4/4s to 5/5s designs...That's totally acceptable because the screen aspect changed, chassis changed and BOM also changed.
Who said Apple was using the same design as 5/5S? And what would you consider a thoroughly thought out design?
Comments
For the last two years, expressions here of desire for a larger screen have been met with "Then buy something else." Could these images signal a degree of poetic justice in those dismissive bumwipes now being in a position of having to choose between THEIR preferred design or another brand? Of having their preferences mocked and insulted they way the small-preferring set have until now, using terms like "moron" and "clown phone?" Wouldn't that be a hilarious turnaround?
But the better man instead hopes for diversity and variety so more users can be happy.
Dude, take a chill pill. I apologize if I offended you with my joke, but come on.
I've held the opinion for years that Apple should produce multiple sizes of phone to maximize customer choice, and therefore maximize purchases. Now, I don't agree that Apple should do as Samsung does and cater to every single niche of the market with a million different phones. But a large-screen phone and a small-screen phone, and one premium and one mid-tier model of each, should be available at all times.
HOWEVER, I am still of the opinion that large-screen phones are ridiculous-looking, inelegant devices that are too large to function as effective/convenient phones and too small to be effective as tablets, and I have a very difficult time seeing myself owning one. That is my opinion. I am entitled to it. But it's only my opinion, and has no impact on whether or not a large-screen phone is the best device for you in your life. I am mocking the device, which I see as straddling the border into Tim Cook's fabled refrigerator-toaster territory. But I am not mocking you for wanting one, nor would I begrudge you getting one.
But calm down and don't take it personally. Geez.
Fingers crossed for LQMT.
I've been a patient (and thus far, disappointed) shareholder!
That’s true… depending on the alloy. Different alloys are attuned to different frequencies.
Your opinion is shared by many, including me.
Your opinion is shared by many, including me.
However, the opposite is also true for many millions.
That's why it is insanely stupid to not make 2 different lines (screen size being the difference and maybe with the extra room they can give more room to the SOC (higher frequency) and a bigger battery), or being against the idea. It happens on every category (tablets, PCs, TVs). Let's not be annoyingly stubborn and blind to the mighty Apple (that also makes mistakes).
There's an whole half of the premium segment that it's not being addressed. That's the difference between growing net profits and 0 growth.
Agree?
I wouldn't be surprised if they'd sell a ton of larger display iPhones if they'd make them. But I think there is something holding them back for a reason. Tim already said so, but without giving away any details. Maybe they would like an extra column with app icons, but don't want yet another big change for developers. Or perhaps they don't see any benefit to a larger display if all it does is scale up the screen.
Just look at the discontinuation of the 17" MBP; they released a screen with even more pixels in a smaller FF. This is what Apple is all about (well, not 'all', you know what I mean): they understand peoples wishes for the continuation of the 17" because people want to make use of the large display, having many pallets next you their main window or whatever. Yet they look at the 'problem' differently; they think that if they can still give users all the pixels they want / need, a smaller FF is better than a larger one. To which I agree; the screen on the rMBP is simply a better product than the older 17" screen.
As far as iPhones go, a larger display will sell. If their unit share sales will decline, people not buying an iPhone + iPad (mini?) but now a larger iPhone is uncertain. I simply can't make any educated guess here, as I'm not educated on the subject, merely posting my rambling.
Stupid text-based medium. You couldn't see the smart-assed smirk on my face as I wrote. No offence taken. Just jabbing back.
We good?
Stupid text-based medium. You couldn't see the smart-assed smirk on my face as I wrote. No offence taken. Just jabbing back.
We good?
Okay.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" /> We're cool.
And I wasn't kidding when I say I agree that Apple needs to diversify the iPhone a little more.
No, the higher density of the Retina does not address the size issue at all. The Retina display has more pixels, but they don't do me any good from a real-estate point of view. You don't get any more windows or palettes on the screen than you would with a non-Retina 15". The Retina is equivalent to the old 1440 15", just sharper. One can scale it to different resolutions, but that just results in text that's too small to read and blurrier than a non-Retina display.
The bottom line is that a 15" Retina is not a particularly good substitute for a 17" screen. That doesn't mean Apple is bad for discontinuing it, just that it is now a vacant category. It is not filled in with the rMBP.
his renders look too much like Samsung Galaxy devices. And i agree that hell will have frozen over if Apple uses asymmetrical bezels in the next iPhone.
I've been discovered?
I would be stunned if the next iPhone will look this ugly. It looks like a bad attempt to respond to demand for bigger screen without throughout redesign the chassis and that I call LAZY design.
As you knew, Apple mentioned in the design patents against Samsung during the law suit that iPhone design has symmetrical screen spaced proportionally between top and the bottom. This purported iPhone 6 has screen shifted to the top to accommodate the extra screen estate which doesn't align with Apple design concept. So, I call this BS. Please give me a more realistically purported iPhone 6 pictures.
I agree that the screen and asymmetrical bezels don't look right, but I'm not sure what you mean by a "throughout redesign the chassis". If the the new iPhone takes design cues from the iPod touch/iPad do you consider that lazy design?
When I said lazy, I meant they used the same design in iPhone 5/5s and shift the screen up to make it bigger. That looks like the bandage design to respond to the demand, not thoroughly thought out. I know people will say about 4/4s to 5/5s designs...That's totally acceptable because the screen aspect changed, chassis changed and BOM also changed.
Dear Apple:
Please hire Martin Hajek to design the next iPhone. His vision of what it could be looks awesome.
Thanks a lot.
Sincerely,
V5V
Dear Apple:
Please don't do that. We need a real phone with real functionality, not a pipe dream that leaves the phone useless. Please remember antennagate.
Sincerely,
zeromeus.
It looks legitimate to me, at least for a design model. Especially after seeing it's dimensions overlaid with an iPhone 5S:
Some points:
Sunny Dickson has a recent track record
Component quality, fit and finish is similar to other Apple device leaks
The design improves significantly on the current model without introducing many tradeoffs (except for a small increase in height).
Maintaining the same width as the iPhone 5S avoids the main drawback of larger-screened phones.
Addressing screen size gives them another reason to revisiting pixel density. 1080p (FULL HD) or higher is a big marketing point. Only slightly higher and you're at 1280-by-2272 which would allow seamless support for legacy software similar to the transition from iPhone 4 > 4S.
Display allows exactly enough room for an additional (7th) row of application icons.
Really? What about symmetrical concept that Apple always followed? Do you think Apple needs big marketing point by adding useless pixels of 1080p which adds zero benefit but drain more battery. When did Apple ever do that? Apple paid developer to create apps compatible with new screen resolution, so they don't care about legacy software transition (4/4s - 5/5s is an example). I don't believe Apple will ever go beyond retina display, so my prediction is 4.5" for the next iPhone with 720p resolution or 326 dpi. Even if they go for 4.7/4.8" screen, it won't be more than 768 x 1366 which is still 326 dpi.
I agree that the screen and asymmetrical bezels don't look right, but I'm not sure what you mean by a "throughout redesign the chassis". If the the new iPhone takes design cues from the iPod touch/iPad do you consider that lazy design?
thoughtful design.
Example?
I was just trying to clarify what the other poster said when s/he said "throughout redesign."