GUESS WHAT? BIGGER PHONES MEAN YOU CAN PUT BIGGER BATTERIES INTO THE PHONE =.=
sorry, this just popped into my head and i had to say it
EDIT:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bankshott
I think I cracked the riddle and it is staring us right in the face. Apps developed with 16:9 aspect ratio will be optimized for both the new iphone AND the not-yet-announced iTV (and vice versa) It almost seems, however, like iPAD would have to go 16:9 at some point...
... 16:9 is an inferior aspect ratio, except for watching widescreen movies. 16:10 and 4:3 (current) are much more useful...
In 2011, Bennie Budler, product manager of IT products at Samsung South Africa, confirmed that monitors capable of 1920x1200 resolutions aren't being manufactured anymore. “It is all about reducing manufacturing costs. The new 16:9 aspect ratio panels are more cost effective to manufacture locally than the previous 16:10 panels”
16:9 was mainly used because it is cheaper =.=, Apple is more about aesthetics PLUS 16:10 is better in almost every way unless all you do is watch movies...
note, i am using wikipedia because it is accurate for this .
And sadly if Apple folds into the 16:9, like many other manufacturers have i think i will not be able to buy a laptop i like.
The way i see it if they make this 16:9 is means that they plan to make everything into 16:9....
Although, the iPhone's current screen of 3:2 isn't really anything special tbh.... i think that 4:3/16:10 woulda been better.... BUT, i trust that it was unfeasable and 3:2 was best option.
ON that note, i hope Cook doesn't appear to succeed (like so far) than bring Apple to 16:9
May I assume that you are still a strict adherent to the Domino Theory in Southeast Asia?
I'm trying to think of an instance in which one would hold a phone in landscape with just one hand. "Watching a movie" is all I can think of, and then you have your thumb available to hit play/pause, etc.
..and your other hand free for um..uhh.. driving the car.
..and your other hand free for um..uhh.. driving the car.
You joke, but have you seen some of the people in this country? I don't really advocate the death of anyone anywhere for any reason, but these people need removed from the gene pool, because I don't think they're sentient.
Note that you can substitute basically anything for "this country" here.
That's an interesting article. I buy the battery life thing, but do Apple really need to worry so much about one handed use?
Out of interest, how many people find their interaction with the iPhone is with one hand? Personally, with the exception of answering a call, I never use it with only one hand.
A lot of people actually do, in currently in High school, and you would be surprised, all my friends have iPhones and our teachers dont care, but when we text we multitask so we text with one hand and do something with the other, i do it all the time. You would be surprised, oh, how many people listen to their iPods and iPhones in the car while driving, i know you shouldn't be looking at your phone while driving looking for a song, but plenty of people do it, using one hand is not as bad as using 2 hands while driving.
If they do go to a 320 PPI display that does only affect the size of current elements by less than 2% so it won't be noticeable on older apps but that does mean they need new display production. Perhaps they are maxed out producing 326 PPI displays but that sounds like a more costly and less efficient method than simply creating more 326 PPI manufacturing for the 1136x960 displays.
This thing is going to look great for a remote control for the apple tv set... As a phone...ugggghhh... Apple think they can do no wrong these days? Let's see them releasing almost the same design, just a bit thinner and with a metal back and the same width screen width at 16:9... boy is it going to sell well...
Just like the iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4S were fraking market and financial disasters for Apple¡ :rolleyes:
Wouldn't this also mean a larger iPod Touch too, see how as it's been a bit since a new model has came out, and it would be a good refresh too, especially for gamers.
May I assume that you are still a strict adherent to the Domino Theory in Southeast Asia?
...
No. I believe it was a stupid theory.
However, Apple has never (to my knowledge) used 16:9...
And WHY would they use it in their phone if they can fit a 16:10 screen (based off example photos given). Note, 16:10 is considered "The Golden Ratio" and VERY aesthetically pleasing.
Apple is about aesthetics... lets be honest, they made a glass phone. I do not care how strong the glass is. Its glass.
Anyhow, notice how they NEVER did anything publically with 16:9 until Steve Jobs was dying... (that i knew of, sorry if i am wrong).
I fear for my non-widescreen format.
Also, if you want to refute my points please do. But just saying domino effect does not do that ~.~
The reason why Apple won't use the 16:10 golden ratio is because that wouldn't mesh as well with legacy apps. The 16:9 is more clean since the width of the screen is identical to the current screen.
However, Apple has never (to my knowledge) used 16:9...
And WHY would they use it in their phone if they can fit a 16:10 screen (based off example photos given). Note, 16:10 is considered "The Golden Ratio" and VERY aesthetically pleasing.
Apple is about aesthetics... lets be honest, they made a glass phone. I do not care how strong the glass is. Its glass.
Anyhow, notice how they NEVER did anything publically with 16:9 until Steve Jobs was dying... (that i knew of, sorry if i am wrong).
I fear for my non-widescreen format.
Also, if you want to refute my points please do. But just saying domino effect does not do that ~.~
All Apple TV UIs - 16:9
11" MBA - 16:9
Rumoured 1136x640 iPhone - Close, but NOT 16:9
Note that they've had plenty of Macs and iPods over the decades that have radically altered their aspect ratios. If 16:10 was the golden ratio then why is the new Nano a 1:1 display? The obvious answer should be that your Golden Ratio, which isn't even 1.60, isn't golden for every display in the world. Also note the Golden Ratio has been known for thousands of years so why you've brought it up now as proof that an iPhone with a 3:2 display couldn't be 16:9 is boggling.
The reason why Apple won't use the 16:10 golden ratio is because that wouldn't mesh as well with legacy apps. The 16:9 is more clean since the width of the screen is identical to the current screen.
1021x640 up through 1027x640 would be 16:10. The question isn't if they could do it as it's clearly just shy of the near 16:9 of the rumour, the question is why would they hinder usability and the user experience to use it?
Wouldn't this also mean a larger iPod Touch too, see how as it's been a bit since a new model has came out, and it would be a good refresh too, especially for gamers.
2010, a few months after the iPhone 4 was released. It definitely needs a refresh.
Android phones have been experimenting with different screen sizes since their beginning. Since many manufacturers have many models... there are tons of different screen sizes.
And now... tall 4 inch and larger 16:9 models make up the bulk of Android phones sold today.
People don't seem to mind them.
Agreed. Whenever I pick up my little 3.7 HTC WP7 device, versus one of my HTC Android phones, I find the size difference to really show in how comfortable the device is to hold for longer periods of time.
My Android phone is a 4.3 inch screen, which is very comfy in hand. The WP7 device cramps my thumb after single handed use for more than 20 minutes.
Note that they've had plenty of Macs and iPods over the decades that have radically altered their aspect ratios. If 16:10 was the golden ratio then why is the new Nano a 1:1 display? The obvious answer should be that your Golden Ratio, which isn't even 1.60, isn't golden for every display in the world. Also note the Golden Ratio has been known for thousands of years so why you've brought it up now as proof that an iPhone with a 3:2 display couldn't be 16:9 is boggling.
1021x640 up through 1027x640 would be 16:10. The question isn't if they could do it as it's clearly just shy of the near 16:9 of the rumour, the question is why would they hinder usability and the user experience to use it?
2010, a few months after the iPhone 4 was released. It definitely needs a refresh.
My bad than
And, my comment was about 16:9 to 16:10 in general. I did get really of topic.
my point with 3:2 vs. 16:9 on iphone is the image makes it appear as if you could make the iphone 16:10 (which i believe would be better in almost every scenario).
Also a huge reason many PC manufactures switched to 16:9 was to CUT COSTS! Which Apple doesn't need to do.
my point with 3:2 vs. 16:9 on iphone is the image makes it appear as if you could make the iphone 16:10 (which i believe would be better in almost every scenario).
TV shows tend to be shot in 16:9.
Movies tend to use a much wider aspect ratio but 16:9 is closer than 16:10, but that's all really meaningless on such a small display, IMO.
The 16:9 could be most cost effective when they have to create individual displays from the sheets being made in the factory. Or it could be that they determined that for the average length of human phalanges and their placement on the hand they've found that 16:9 allows for a more ideal display to touch ratio for a given display size.
To me the bigger question is why they choose the very usual 3:2 to begin with. The 4:3 of the iPad makes perfect sense and I even argued that size a year before it was announced despite being told repeatedly that 4:3 aspect ratio was obsolete as if that makes any sense. I have plenty of theories as to why they choose 3:2 for the iPhone but none feel solid.
Did you flunk math or geometry in school. Seriously how does more area on screen lead to less of the web page being viewed? A wider screen will be of huge benefit to those that view the web on their iPhones. Frankly if you visit these forums on your iPhone it should be pretty damn obvious.
Honestly how did you come to this point of view? Has your mind been twisted by the Democratic party?
It's a matter of reflow. If the page behaves fixedly, he happens to be right. Obviously, the page should accommodate the view and hence he's, on average, wrong.
It's not a matter of having more area to display the page, it's a matter of the page, given a certain height, showing less content IF the width is higher and it doesn't reflow. As an example, imagine a picture with a certain aspect ratio, in front of a two centimeter high "window". If your "window" can grow as wide as you wish, and your picture can grow as wide as the "window", you'll eventually see less and less of the initial picture.
Apart from that, the pure "politics" aspect of your answer is ridiculous. I could pretend that your inability to put yourself in someone else's shoes (and hence understand why they believe what they believe) is a clear sign that the Republicans have twisted your mind. Found many mass destruction weapons lately in Irak? A healthy dose of thinking sometimes helps. Note: if you're from Eastern Texas, disregard all I wrote, you have a special legal statutory right to mind-blankedness.
This is one of 3 requirements for me to jump from Android. I'll fully admit that my Galaxy Nexus can be cumbersome at times. But a 3.5in screen is just too small. And I'm in 31. I can't imagine too many folks older than me are fans of smaller screens. Apple fans will say it's all about the resolution. I don't buy it. At a certain point size matters. I'd argue that around 4in you hit the sweet spot between screen size and handling.
Comments
GUESS WHAT? BIGGER PHONES MEAN YOU CAN PUT BIGGER BATTERIES INTO THE PHONE =.=
sorry, this just popped into my head and i had to say it
EDIT:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bankshott
I think I cracked the riddle and it is staring us right in the face. Apps developed with 16:9 aspect ratio will be optimized for both the new iphone AND the not-yet-announced iTV (and vice versa) It almost seems, however, like iPAD would have to go 16:9 at some point...
... 16:9 is an inferior aspect ratio, except for watching widescreen movies. 16:10 and 4:3 (current) are much more useful...
plus 16:10 is "the golden ratio" first, see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_ratio#Aesthetics
second see this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16:10 AND http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widescreen#Computer_displays
note:
Quote:
In 2011, Bennie Budler, product manager of IT products at Samsung South Africa, confirmed that monitors capable of 1920x1200 resolutions aren't being manufactured anymore. “It is all about reducing manufacturing costs. The new 16:9 aspect ratio panels are more cost effective to manufacture locally than the previous 16:10 panels”
16:9 was mainly used because it is cheaper =.=, Apple is more about aesthetics PLUS 16:10 is better in almost every way unless all you do is watch movies...
note, i am using wikipedia because it is accurate for this
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicolbolas
And sadly if Apple folds into the 16:9, like many other manufacturers have i think i will not be able to buy a laptop i like.
The way i see it if they make this 16:9 is means that they plan to make everything into 16:9....
Although, the iPhone's current screen of 3:2 isn't really anything special tbh.... i think that 4:3/16:10 woulda been better.... BUT, i trust that it was unfeasable and 3:2 was best option.
ON that note, i hope Cook doesn't appear to succeed (like so far) than bring Apple to 16:9
May I assume that you are still a strict adherent to the Domino Theory in Southeast Asia?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
I'm trying to think of an instance in which one would hold a phone in landscape with just one hand. "Watching a movie" is all I can think of, and then you have your thumb available to hit play/pause, etc.
..and your other hand free for um..uhh.. driving the car.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky
..and your other hand free for um..uhh.. driving the car.
You joke, but have you seen some of the people in this country? I don't really advocate the death of anyone anywhere for any reason, but these people need removed from the gene pool, because I don't think they're sentient.
Note that you can substitute basically anything for "this country" here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson
That's an interesting article. I buy the battery life thing, but do Apple really need to worry so much about one handed use?
Out of interest, how many people find their interaction with the iPhone is with one hand? Personally, with the exception of answering a call, I never use it with only one hand.
A lot of people actually do, in currently in High school, and you would be surprised, all my friends have iPhones and our teachers dont care, but when we text we multitask so we text with one hand and do something with the other, i do it all the time. You would be surprised, oh, how many people listen to their iPods and iPhones in the car while driving, i know you shouldn't be looking at your phone while driving looking for a song, but plenty of people do it, using one hand is not as bad as using 2 hands while driving.
Screen size sounds good to me
Just like the iPhone 3GS and iPhone 4S were fraking market and financial disasters for Apple¡ :rolleyes:
You're holding it wrong.
Wouldn't this also mean a larger iPod Touch too, see how as it's been a bit since a new model has came out, and it would be a good refresh too, especially for gamers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky
May I assume that you are still a strict adherent to the Domino Theory in Southeast Asia?
...
No. I believe it was a stupid theory.
However, Apple has never (to my knowledge) used 16:9...
And WHY would they use it in their phone if they can fit a 16:10 screen (based off example photos given). Note, 16:10 is considered "The Golden Ratio" and VERY aesthetically pleasing.
Apple is about aesthetics... lets be honest, they made a glass phone. I do not care how strong the glass is. Its glass.
Anyhow, notice how they NEVER did anything publically with 16:9 until Steve Jobs was dying... (that i knew of, sorry if i am wrong).
I fear for my non-widescreen format.
Also, if you want to refute my points please do. But just saying domino effect does not do that ~.~
The reason why Apple won't use the 16:10 golden ratio is because that wouldn't mesh as well with legacy apps. The 16:9 is more clean since the width of the screen is identical to the current screen.
All Apple TV UIs - 16:9
11" MBA - 16:9
Rumoured 1136x640 iPhone - Close, but NOT 16:9
Note that they've had plenty of Macs and iPods over the decades that have radically altered their aspect ratios. If 16:10 was the golden ratio then why is the new Nano a 1:1 display? The obvious answer should be that your Golden Ratio, which isn't even 1.60, isn't golden for every display in the world. Also note the Golden Ratio has been known for thousands of years so why you've brought it up now as proof that an iPhone with a 3:2 display couldn't be 16:9 is boggling.
1021x640 up through 1027x640 would be 16:10. The question isn't if they could do it as it's clearly just shy of the near 16:9 of the rumour, the question is why would they hinder usability and the user experience to use it?
2010, a few months after the iPhone 4 was released. It definitely needs a refresh.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Scrip
Android phones have been experimenting with different screen sizes since their beginning. Since many manufacturers have many models... there are tons of different screen sizes.
And now... tall 4 inch and larger 16:9 models make up the bulk of Android phones sold today.
People don't seem to mind them.
Agreed. Whenever I pick up my little 3.7 HTC WP7 device, versus one of my HTC Android phones, I find the size difference to really show in how comfortable the device is to hold for longer periods of time.
My Android phone is a 4.3 inch screen, which is very comfy in hand. The WP7 device cramps my thumb after single handed use for more than 20 minutes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
All Apple TV UIs - 16:9
11" MBA - 16:9
Rumoured 1136x640 iPhone - Close, but NOT 16:9
Note that they've had plenty of Macs and iPods over the decades that have radically altered their aspect ratios. If 16:10 was the golden ratio then why is the new Nano a 1:1 display? The obvious answer should be that your Golden Ratio, which isn't even 1.60, isn't golden for every display in the world. Also note the Golden Ratio has been known for thousands of years so why you've brought it up now as proof that an iPhone with a 3:2 display couldn't be 16:9 is boggling.
1021x640 up through 1027x640 would be 16:10. The question isn't if they could do it as it's clearly just shy of the near 16:9 of the rumour, the question is why would they hinder usability and the user experience to use it?
2010, a few months after the iPhone 4 was released. It definitely needs a refresh.
My bad than
And, my comment was about 16:9 to 16:10 in general. I did get really of topic.
my point with 3:2 vs. 16:9 on iphone is the image makes it appear as if you could make the iphone 16:10 (which i believe would be better in almost every scenario).
Also a huge reason many PC manufactures switched to 16:9 was to CUT COSTS! Which Apple doesn't need to do.
EDIT: took out lots of pointless smilies
TV shows tend to be shot in 16:9.
Movies tend to use a much wider aspect ratio but 16:9 is closer than 16:10, but that's all really meaningless on such a small display, IMO.
The 16:9 could be most cost effective when they have to create individual displays from the sheets being made in the factory. Or it could be that they determined that for the average length of human phalanges and their placement on the hand they've found that 16:9 allows for a more ideal display to touch ratio for a given display size.
To me the bigger question is why they choose the very usual 3:2 to begin with. The 4:3 of the iPad makes perfect sense and I even argued that size a year before it was announced despite being told repeatedly that 4:3 aspect ratio was obsolete as if that makes any sense. I have plenty of theories as to why they choose 3:2 for the iPhone but none feel solid.
Would you guys stop crying?
Do you think Apple doesn't know what they are doing?
Do you think Apple doesn't insanely test multiple prototypes first?
DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT APPLE???
Pre-WWDC excitement is ok.
Pre-WWDC rumors, oh my! doom and gloom! is so annoying.
Just shut up and wait for Monday.
Thanks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
Did you flunk math or geometry in school. Seriously how does more area on screen lead to less of the web page being viewed? A wider screen will be of huge benefit to those that view the web on their iPhones. Frankly if you visit these forums on your iPhone it should be pretty damn obvious.
Honestly how did you come to this point of view? Has your mind been twisted by the Democratic party?
It's a matter of reflow. If the page behaves fixedly, he happens to be right. Obviously, the page should accommodate the view and hence he's, on average, wrong.
It's not a matter of having more area to display the page, it's a matter of the page, given a certain height, showing less content IF the width is higher and it doesn't reflow. As an example, imagine a picture with a certain aspect ratio, in front of a two centimeter high "window". If your "window" can grow as wide as you wish, and your picture can grow as wide as the "window", you'll eventually see less and less of the initial picture.
Apart from that, the pure "politics" aspect of your answer is ridiculous. I could pretend that your inability to put yourself in someone else's shoes (and hence understand why they believe what they believe) is a clear sign that the Republicans have twisted your mind. Found many mass destruction weapons lately in Irak? A healthy dose of thinking sometimes helps. Note: if you're from Eastern Texas, disregard all I wrote, you have a special legal statutory right to mind-blankedness.
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbansprawl
Would you guys stop crying?
Do you think Apple doesn't know what they are doing?
Do you think Apple doesn't insanely test multiple prototypes first?
DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT APPLE???
Pre-WWDC excitement is ok.
Pre-WWDC rumors, oh my! doom and gloom! is so annoying.
Just shut up and wait for Monday.
Thanks.
U mad bro? That's 90% of the fun of the week!
This is one of 3 requirements for me to jump from Android. I'll fully admit that my Galaxy Nexus can be cumbersome at times. But a 3.5in screen is just too small. And I'm in 31. I can't imagine too many folks older than me are fans of smaller screens. Apple fans will say it's all about the resolution. I don't buy it. At a certain point size matters. I'd argue that around 4in you hit the sweet spot between screen size and handling.