Alleged 'iPhone 7' leak offers crystal clear look at larger single-lens camera, tweaked antenna lin

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 79
    noelosnoelos Posts: 104member
    cpenzone said:
    Just posted this but I think it looks fake. There is a reflection of what appears to be the ground below the iPhone in the camera lens and in the Apple logo... that doesn't make any sense.
    I think the camera and Apple logo aren't reflecting but are cutouts; you're seeing through the holes to the ground (in the case of the camera hole) and the fingers (in the case of the logo cutout). Which doesn't make it "not fake".
    kayessnolamacguy
  • Reply 42 of 79
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,831member
    What antenna lines?  I'm serious.  I saw antenna lines on my 6 for exactly the 12 seconds it took to put the leather case on it.  Haven't seen or thought about them since.
    If everything gets shoved in a case what's the point of using "premium" materials? Might as well just make a plastic phone then.
    There is nothing premium about aluminum, the fact that Apple markets it as such to the gullible doesn't mean it is so.   The fact is, aluminum is an extremely easy material to work with in an industrial setting.   Aluminum machines like butter, closer to wood than most metals and is amendable to other processes suck as die casting.  As far as plastics go, there are premium plastic resins that would make for an excellent iPhone case but they are expensive.

    What makes a device desirable isn't so much the material it is made of but rather how well designed it is for the material used. Apple could make an iPhone case out of bamboo if they wanted too and have even greater ecological advantages.   They don't because thin is in.  
    lord amhranrepressthis
  • Reply 43 of 79
    jakebjakeb Posts: 557member
    Really interested in that giant camera. Even if its not the linx camera, it seems especially large for a phone. Assuming it's not just an aesthetic thing and the sensor is still tiny. 
  • Reply 44 of 79
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,831member
    emig647 said:
    I'm surprised they are still going with the camera bump. I suppose they feel everyone uses a case. I wonder what the statistics on case usage?

    Ultimate reason I haven't purchased an iPad Pro 9.7 neutral 
    I really don't understand why people are so dense with respect to the so called camera bump. It is there to optimize optical performance. Optical performance is critical because one of the huge selling points of the iPhone is its camera performance. In other words the reason a lot of people consider the iPhone is directly due to that bump. The bump will be there until more advanced technology arrives to replace conventional lenses.
    igorskyrepressthisnolamacguy
  • Reply 45 of 79
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 4,106member
    wizard69 said:
    emig647 said:
    I'm surprised they are still going with the camera bump. I suppose they feel everyone uses a case. I wonder what the statistics on case usage?

    Ultimate reason I haven't purchased an iPad Pro 9.7 neutral 
    I really don't understand why people are so dense with respect to the so called camera bump. It is there to optimize optical performance. Optical performance is critical because one of the huge selling points of the iPhone is its camera performance. In other words the reason a lot of people consider the iPhone is directly due to that bump. The bump will be there until more advanced technology arrives to replace conventional lenses.
    The bump wouldn't be there if the phone was slightly thicker. 
  • Reply 46 of 79
    igorsky said:
    If this was a leak from Samsung or some other Android OEM no doubt people here would be calling it fugly. But since it's coming from Apple these things are no longer important?
    This guy again.  The internet is a big place...go troll somewhere else.
    Rogifan is 100% correct. Were this phone design from any manufacturer OTHER than Apple then everybody here would be howling about the "shitty design" but because it IS from Apple it gets a pass much in the same way the iPhone battery cover got a pass from everybody.
    edited July 2016 singularity
  • Reply 47 of 79
    igorskyigorsky Posts: 422member
    igorsky said:
    This guy again.  The internet is a big place...go troll somewhere else.
    Rogifan is 100% correct. Were this phone design from any manufacturer OTHER than Apple then everybody here would be howling about the "shitty design" but because it IS from Apple it gets a pass much in the same way the iPhone battery cover got a pass from everybody.

    This line of thinking by Apple haters is nonsensical because, if anything, Apple is under way more scrutiny than any other manufacturer.  For example Android phones have all used camera mountains on the backs of their phones forever, yet Apple releases a phone with a slight camera protrusion and the internet goes nuts.  Antenna lines are acceptable for every phone but it's a sin if Apple uses them.  The original iPhone was the first mass-market aluminum smartphone, yet somehow Apple is the one that's copying HTC.  Rene over at iMore has posted numerous photos showing that none of the ports at the bottom of Samsung's "flaghsip" Galaxys line up, almost as though a group of amateurs used a 3D printer to manufacture it.  I can go on and on with ludicrous examples of the design double standard that exists.

    So do us all a favor...take Rogifan with you to an Android site and peddle your Apple conspiracies on a forum where such stupidity will be widely, and blindly, accepted.
    edited July 2016 repressthisnolamacguyRayz2016brucemcpatchythepirate
  • Reply 48 of 79
    huffcwhuffcw Posts: 51member
    I still like the all glass iPhone 4 the best from a design perspective. While I know it had its own problems, I wish Apple would go back to that approach and refine. 
  • Reply 49 of 79
    emig647 said:
    I'm surprised they are still going with the camera bump. I suppose they feel everyone uses a case. I wonder what the statistics on case usage?

    Ultimate reason I haven't purchased an iPad Pro 9.7 :neutral: 
    The bump on the iPad Pro has no effect on usage. It feels like it isn't there when sitting flat for drawing, etc.
    nolamacguy
  • Reply 50 of 79
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,510member
    wizard69 said:
    I really don't understand why people are so dense with respect to the so called camera bump. It is there to optimize optical performance. Optical performance is critical because one of the huge selling points of the iPhone is its camera performance. In other words the reason a lot of people consider the iPhone is directly due to that bump. The bump will be there until more advanced technology arrives to replace conventional lenses.
    The bump wouldn't be there if the phone was slightly thicker. 
    Which would be 2 or 3 mm thicker, totally unacceptable from that point of view alone. But since the space would be filled with battery and not air (economy of space imperative), it would also be unacceptably heavier, as Phil said on Gruber's Talk Show.

    And speaking of imperatives, here's a deep one for you: Ive and company are bound by the one inviolable law of information technology, the same as embodied in Moore's Law, Buckminster Fuller's geodesic principles, even Formula One racing — you must shrink the hardware to the maximum extent possible and still do the job better than what went before. 

    That's the overall design and engineering mandate. The camera bump is a minor compromise in comparison, probably just as painful to Ive as to anybody.
    edited July 2016 igorskyrepressthisnolamacguyfastasleepbrucemc
  • Reply 51 of 79
    igorsky said:

    This line of thinking by Apple haters is nonsensical because, if anything, Apple is under way more scrutiny than any other manufacturer.  For example Android phones have all used camera mountains on the backs of their phones forever, yet Apple releases a phone with a slight camera protrusion and the internet goes nuts.  Antenna lines are acceptable for every phone but it's a sin if Apple uses them.  The original iPhone was the first mass-market aluminum smartphone, yet somehow Apple is the one that's copying HTC.  Rene over at iMore has posted numerous photos showing that none of the ports at the bottom of Samsung's "flaghsip" Galaxys line up, almost as though a group of amateurs used a 3D printer to manufacture it.  I can go on and on with ludicrous examples of the design double standard that exists.

    So do us all a favor...take Rogifan with you to an Android site and peddle your Apple conspiracies on a forum where such stupidity will be widely, and blindly, accepted.
    THANK YOU, one hundred times over. Where has the ability to reason gone for half of these wee lil' children? Out the window, apparently. AppleInsider needs to post a new article that reads more like an intervention for commenters losing there minds.
    edited July 2016 nolamacguybrucemc
  • Reply 52 of 79
    igorsky said:
    You would think this genius would take pictures of all aspects of the case, since he seemed to have access to a pre-production part seemingly outside.  What's the bottom look like?
    Or maybe, just maybe, this is a fake and all other aspects would reveal that it's a fake?
    The lens is fake as heck. It's ridiculous (I'm a 3-D designer at a movie studio).
  • Reply 53 of 79
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    cpenzone said:
    Am I the only one that thinks this looks fake?  Why would the ground beneath the image be reflected in the camera lens and off the apple logo?
    are you serious? those are obviously cut-outs in the case shell material, not reflections.
    fastasleeprepressthis
  • Reply 54 of 79
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 4,106member
    flaneur said:
    The bump wouldn't be there if the phone was slightly thicker. 
    Which would be 2 or 3 mm thicker, totally unacceptable from that point of view alone. But since the space would be filled with battery and not air (economy of space imperative), it would also be unacceptably heavier, as Phil said on Gruber's Talk Show.

    And speaking of imperatives, here's a deep one for you: Ive and company are bound by the one inviolable law of information technology, the same as embodied in Moore's Law, Buckminster Fuller's geodesic principles, even Formula One racing — you must shrink the hardware to the maximum extent possible and still do the job better than what went before. 

    That's the overall design and engineering mandate. The camera bump is a minor compromise in comparison, probably just as painful to Ive as to anybody.
    iPhone 4 didn't have a camera bump. Were people back then complaining about how awful that phone was because it was too heavy? I don't think so. And the antenna line design isn't an engineering issue. HTC and other Android OEMs have found a way to design antenna lines that aren't a complete eye sore. I'm not crazy about the Huawei phone below but at least the antenna lines blend with the color of the case so they don't stick out as much.


    image
    edited July 2016 singularitydasanman69
  • Reply 55 of 79
    razormaidrazormaid Posts: 299member
    It doesn't matter where they (Apple) put those white lines, that's still ugly. Couldn't Apple just make the lines the same colour as the case or even a shade lighter than the case? 
    I totally agree. Unless it's because the front is white so from the front it looks better??

    i really wish they'd make a gold metal with black front. That would look really nice. Hopefully those dark blue photos are real and they're adding that option with a black front. 
  • Reply 56 of 79
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    flaneur said:
    Which would be 2 or 3 mm thicker, totally unacceptable from that point of view alone. But since the space would be filled with battery and not air (economy of space imperative), it would also be unacceptably heavier, as Phil said on Gruber's Talk Show.

    And speaking of imperatives, here's a deep one for you: Ive and company are bound by the one inviolable law of information technology, the same as embodied in Moore's Law, Buckminster Fuller's geodesic principles, even Formula One racing — you must shrink the hardware to the maximum extent possible and still do the job better than what went before. 

    That's the overall design and engineering mandate. The camera bump is a minor compromise in comparison, probably just as painful to Ive as to anybody.
    iPhone 4 didn't have a camera bump. Were people back then complaining about how awful that phone was because it was too heavy? 
    this truly goes without saying, but ill say it anyway to this apparent trolling:

    1) the iphone 4 had a 3.5" screen and was much smaller than than the 6 series and 6+ series. thus obviously it wouldnt be as heavy as a 6 or 6+ of the same thickness. and i for one dont want my large phone to be that thick again, especially since i put a case on it.

    2) it's completely absurd to suggest what was satisfactory in a phone-camera released in 2010 would be acceptable today. in no universe would i trade my 6s' camera for the one in my old 4 -- and i doubt you would either. but if you would (really?) id suggest youre in an unusual minority of people who prioritize their phone's thickness/camera-bump over the actual photos they get from it.
    edited July 2016 brucemcrepressthisroundaboutnow
  • Reply 57 of 79
    nolamacguynolamacguy Posts: 4,758member
    igorsky said:
    Or maybe, just maybe, this is a fake and all other aspects would reveal that it's a fake?
    The lens is fake as heck. It's ridiculous (I'm a 3-D designer at a movie studio).
    what does your working at a movie studio have to do w/ your ability to authenticate these images for us?

    ive seen this pattern. every year as we get closer to production these leaks come out. and every year people go insane and claim theyre fake and/or that they hate it. then the phone comes out and sells in insane numbers. the end.
    TurboPGTfastasleeproundaboutnow
  • Reply 58 of 79
    TurboPGTTurboPGT Posts: 355member
    ireland said:
    Still say it won't be called iPhone 7.
    You'd be wrong.
  • Reply 59 of 79
    rogifan_newrogifan_new Posts: 4,106member
    iPhone 4 didn't have a camera bump. Were people back then complaining about how awful that phone was because it was too heavy? 
    this truly goes without saying, but ill say it anyway to this apparent trolling:

    1) the iphone 4 had a 3.5" screen and was much smaller than than the 6 series and 6+ series. thus obviously it wouldnt be as heavy as a 6 or 6+ of the same thickness. and i for one dont want my large phone to be that thick again, especially since i put a case on it.

    2) it's completely absurd to suggest what was satisfactory in a phone-camera released in 2010 would be acceptable today. in no universe would i trade my 6s' camera for the one in my old 4 -- and i doubt you would either. but if you would (really?) id suggest youre in an unusual minority of people who prioritize their phone's thickness/camera-bump over the actual photos they get from it.
    I'm certainly not the only one who isn't a fan of the camera bump.  Heck even John Gruber calls it "gross". I've never suggested the iPhone camera should be worse so there is no bump. I'm just not convinced making the phone thick enough to eliminate a bump would have cause it to be too thick and heavy. I owned the iPad Air 1 and 2 and I preferred the 1 because it didn't get as hot and there was less sound vibration. Thinner isn't always better. Thankfully Apple mostly fixed the sound vibration issue with the iPad Pro line.
    lord amhrandasanman69
  • Reply 60 of 79
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,630member
    flaneur said:
    The bump wouldn't be there if the phone was slightly thicker. 
    Which would be 2 or 3 mm thicker, totally unacceptable from that point of view alone. But since the space would be filled with battery and not air (economy of space imperative), it would also be unacceptably heavier, as Phil said on Gruber's Talk Show.

    And speaking of imperatives, here's a deep one for you: Ive and company are bound by the one inviolable law of information technology, the same as embodied in Moore's Law, Buckminster Fuller's geodesic principles, even Formula One racing — you must shrink the hardware to the maximum extent possible and still do the job better than what went before. 

    That's the overall design and engineering mandate. The camera bump is a minor compromise in comparison, probably just as painful to Ive as to anybody.
    +1
    repressthis
Sign In or Register to comment.