New capacitive touch nodes from Apple could result in thinner iPhones

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iLiver View Post


    Yet another example of SJ's and JI's obsession with thinness, though definitely needed in the iPad.

    Hopefully it looses some girth in the next gen.



    Lift weights. If you find that device thick you're nuts. Outside of a few millimeters of reduction you don't sacrifice strength to please the one out of the many in a crowd.
  • Reply 22 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by juandl View Post


    It just seems that Apple nowadays has a ton of ideas they want to get into.



    They had a lot of Patents approved in 2010, but they weren't the biggest approved. IBM, Microsoft and others beat them out. But the big difference is that Apple seems to have a plan to the Patents they are seeking. And most of the stuff they keep coming up with seems to be very appealing to a whole lot of folk.

    I don't think you can say the same thing about the other guys.



    If Apple shares keep climbing relevant to all the things they keep coming up with, 2012 should show them as the biggest company in the world.



    As a side note: It had been mentioned that Steve Jobs liked to keep work groups small, in order to remember peoples names. If they have that many Steves. Maybe they will be hiring more people.



    They tend to patent new ways to do things we've always done. IBM & Microsoft tend to patent things relating to stuff most of us never use, sometimes they are concepts that are likely to be irrelevant by the time they become practical. Apple has been very good at having their finger on the pulse of tech trends, though there are probably a lot of people who feel it is because they are good at selling people on their way of doing things. Me personally I just like how much most of their products seem to simplify things, saves me a lot of time on the simple stuff. I know several people who dislike Apple products for that very reason, they'd rather have 100 different ways to do something and an interface so complex you have to be a bit of a techie to use it. I get enough techie at work, I just need my devices in my life to work so I can spend time with my family instead of reloading computers or on the phone with support. Probably spent couple hours on the phone every 3-4 months with support for my BBerry and back when I had a PC I would end up re-installing everything every 1-2 months because some driver update botched the system or some other unexplained issue arose (usually with windows updates). When Apple went Intel I switched and now I hardly even have to touch my computer at home, unless I want to that is.
  • Reply 23 of 41
    newbeenewbee Posts: 2,055member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by juandl View Post


    They had a lot of Patents approved in 2010, but they weren't the biggest approved. IBM, Microsoft and others beat them out. But the big difference is that Apple seems to have a plan to the Patents they are seeking. And most of the stuff they keep coming up with seems to be very appealing to a whole lot of folk.

    I don't think you can say the same thing about the other guys.



    You're right ..... It's the difference between a company like Apple who, time and time again, has stated that their goal/philosophy is to make "insanely great products/services" ..... as opposed to the "other guys" who just throw s**t at the wall to see what sticks .... no vision, no goal, no focus, other than to "make money" .... it just blows my mind that so many companies "just don't get it"! ..... It's not like it's rocket science or something. Most of us have long ago learned that ... what we focus on is what we achieve. ...
  • Reply 24 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KingOfSomewhereHot View Post


    Personally, I'd rather see the phone stay the same size and add a little more battery in the freed-up space.



    Absolutely agree, are you listening Apple,..
  • Reply 25 of 41
    rot'napplerot'napple Posts: 1,839member
    Hey ex-Palm, ex-CEO Ed Colligan,



    Remember when you commented back in 2006 regarding the persistent rumors that Apple will be introducing a Apple phone in the near future, and that you were not concerned about Apple's possible entry into the smart-phone market?



    "We've learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,'' he said. "PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They're not going to just walk in.''



    Well maybe your're right with regards to some "PC guys"...



    But these were Mac guys Ed, and this is what happens when THE REAL PC GUYS figure this out when they just walk in!



    And it's only the beginning Ed. Only the beginning!
  • Reply 26 of 41
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hezetation View Post


    They tend to patent new ways to do things we've always done. IBM & Microsoft tend to patent things relating to stuff most of us never use, sometimes they are concepts that are likely to be irrelevant by the time they become practical. Apple has been very good at having their finger on the pulse of tech trends, though there are probably a lot of people who feel it is because they are good at selling people on their way of doing things. Me personally I just like how much most of their products seem to simplify things, saves me a lot of time on the simple stuff. I know several people who dislike Apple products for that very reason, they'd rather have 100 different ways to do something and an interface so complex you have to be a bit of a techie to use it. I get enough techie at work, I just need my devices in my life to work so I can spend time with my family instead of reloading computers or on the phone with support. Probably spent couple hours on the phone every 3-4 months with support for my BBerry and back when I had a PC I would end up re-installing everything every 1-2 months because some driver update botched the system or some other unexplained issue arose (usually with windows updates). When Apple went Intel I switched and now I hardly even have to touch my computer at home, unless I want to that is.



    I think it helps that Apple is incredibly focused. Outfits like MS or IBM (or even Samsung and Sony, for that matter) have fingers in a millions pies. I get the impression that they have all kinds of projects in development, working on the principle that if you keeps enough balls in the air something may eventually land that looks useful.



    Apple doesn't that luxury. They make a relative handful of devices, organized around even fewer product lines, and all they want to do in the world is eke out some competitive advantage by improving those specific devices in specific, tangible ways. IBM may be doing basic research into semiconductor design, MS may have labs devoted to blue-sky thinking around futuristic interfaces, but Apple wants to make faster, lighter, more efficient iPads, iPhones, and laptops now.



    Of course Apple also does development for more speculative products further out, but even here they benefit from a strong sense of where they're going. I suspect the entire iOS platform was on the drawing table within months of Steve's return to Apple, being the "next insanely great thing." And I have no reason to believe that the next thing beyond that is being nailed down, with patentable technologies, even now. But whatever it is its not going to be proof of concept distractions like Surface or Courier. It'll be a solid vision of what computing looks like after, say, 2020, with a fully fleshed out road map and a time table for bringing products to market.
  • Reply 27 of 41
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KingOfSomewhereHot View Post


    Personally, I'd rather see the phone stay the same size and add a little more battery in the freed-up space.



    Agreed... Not to mention that if the phone gets any thinner I'd be very nervous about it snapping apart like a chocolate candy bar.
  • Reply 28 of 41
    penchantedpenchanted Posts: 1,070member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by KingOfSomewhereHot View Post


    Personally, I'd rather see the phone stay the same size and add a little more battery in the freed-up space.



    Agreed. Making the iPhone thinner might also affect camera performance, specifically with reference to depth of focus.
  • Reply 29 of 41
    penchantedpenchanted Posts: 1,070member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Onhka View Post


    The iPhone will be thinner. Much thinner. The battery life will be much longer.



    Material costs will be reduced significantly.



    In fact, one day the iPhone will be like a credit card. Even disposable, like contact lenses.



    Turn it on with a finger/thumb print. Activate, update, restore and recharge even thru your bank or bank-like machine.



    My only hope, is that i will be around to tell many of you, "I told so," or that many of you are not still around.



    Even if battery performance in a thinner device could match or exceed the existing device, I think making the device much thinner is likely to negatively impact camera performace - the lens would practically be sitting on top of the image sensor.
  • Reply 30 of 41
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by penchanted View Post


    Even if battery performance in a thinner device could match or exceed the existing device, I think making the device much thinner is likely to negatively impact camera performace - the lens would practically be sitting on top of the image sensor.



    It's always a juggling act, always tradeoffs. Size, weight, performance, battery life. Each impacts all the others. Apple seems to do a pretty good job of finding a happy medium, with perhaps a bit of a bias towards size.
  • Reply 31 of 41
    penchantedpenchanted Posts: 1,070member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    I think it helps that Apple is incredibly focused. Outfits like MS or IBM (or even Samsung and Sony, for that matter) have fingers in a millions pies. I get the impression that they have all kinds of projects in development, working on the principle that if you keeps enough balls in the air something may eventually land that looks useful.



    Apple doesn't that luxury. They make a relative handful of devices, organized around even fewer product lines, and all they want to do in the world is eke out some competitive advantage by improving those specific devices in specific, tangible ways. IBM may be doing basic research into semiconductor design, MS may have labs devoted to blue-sky thinking around futuristic interfaces, but Apple wants to make faster, lighter, more efficient iPads, iPhones, and laptops now.



    Of course Apple also does development for more speculative products further out, but even here they benefit from a strong sense of where they're going. I suspect the entire iOS platform was on the drawing table within months of Steve's return to Apple, being the "next insanely great thing." And I have no reason to believe that the next thing beyond that is being nailed down, with patentable technologies, even now. But whatever it is its not going to be proof of concept distractions like Surface or Courier. It'll be a solid vision of what computing looks like after, say, 2020, with a fully fleshed out road map and a time table for bringing products to market.



    One of the first things Jobs did when he returned to Apple was shut down the Advanced Technology Group. Besides the obvious financial benefits, I think Jobs saw this kind of research as what led to the problems with delivering Copeland and Gershwin.



    Jobs seems to prefer research that leads to the "possible" rather than grand schemes which open up the "impossible". I once feared that this approach would hurt Apple down the road but here we are 13 years later and Apple is stronger than ever. This approach leads to patents that are more likely to be used and monetized sooner.
  • Reply 32 of 41
    penchantedpenchanted Posts: 1,070member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    It's always a juggling act, always tradeoffs. Size, weight, performance, battery life. Each impacts all the others. Apple seems to do a pretty good job of finding a happy medium, with perhaps a bit of a bias towards size.



    True enough. But I really do think we are getting down to the limits of optics and physics with regard to camera performance as we know it. Perhaps Apple is working on addressing the depth of focus issue in some new way - I certainly would not bet against them.
  • Reply 33 of 41
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,665member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by penchanted View Post


    One of the first things Jobs did when he returned to Apple was shut down the Advanced Technology Group. Besides the obvious financial benefits, I think Jobs saw this kind of research as what led to the problems with delivering Copeland and Gershwin.



    Jobs seems to prefer research that leads to the "possible" rather than grand schemes which open up the "impossible". I once feared that this approach would hurt Apple down the road but here we are 13 years later and Apple is stronger than ever. This approach leads to patents that are more likely to be used and monetized sooner.



    Yes. Apple's success these last years can be attributed to a combination of "just enough" vision to yield pragmatic advances combined with the focus and discipline to ship working product.



    I think that's why some folks get so cranky about Apple's style-- that they're "not really" innovating and just "slightly improving" existing tech. That may be true in a sense, but conveniently ignores the fact that the rest of the industry is either doing nothing at all to advance the art, as in the case of low margin parts assemblers, or tossing around unfocused, vaporous visions of the future, as in the case of MS or, horrifyingly, Samsung and their bizarre presentation at CES.
  • Reply 34 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by eyepad View Post


    Now take the new thin screen and make it 4"



    Apparently I'm not allowed to post anything under 5 characters so this line must precede my



    +1
  • Reply 35 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post


    Quote:
    Originally Posted by iLiver View Post


    Yet another example of SJ's and JI's obsession with thinness, though definitely needed in the iPad. Hopefully it looses some girth in the next gen.



    Lift weights.



    If undoing his belt causes iLiver to "loose girth" then lifting weights is definitely advised
  • Reply 36 of 41
    justflybobjustflybob Posts: 1,337member
    While I may be personally looking to get thinner...



    My iPhone? Not so much...
  • Reply 37 of 41
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,523member
    They will be doubling as credit cards soon!
  • Reply 38 of 41
    Just shows Apple is inovative and just not complacent with their current showcase.
  • Reply 39 of 41
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    They will be doubling as credit cards soon!



    Remember how the original iPod shuffle had a "do not eat" disclaimer? Maybe one day we'll see them reminding users that it's bad etiquette to floss with their iPhones.
  • Reply 40 of 41
    onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by penchanted View Post


    Even if battery performance in a thinner device could match or exceed the existing device, I think making the device much thinner is likely to negatively impact camera performace - the lens would practically be sitting on top of the image sensor.



    Who would have ever thought just a few years ago, that last week a camera lens less that an 2.9 mm (0.1141 inches or 1/9th of an inch) thick would be introduced?
Sign In or Register to comment.