That's exactly the path that Apple took with their (expletive deleted) pixel doubling strategy to begin with. They did this to encourage development by all the developers unused to better programming.
**** you sound like paid shill! I suppose APIs and memory management are just tools for Apple to baby their shitty App Store developers, too? It's too bad iOS doesn't have great apps like you find in Google Play with those real developers that are used to programming better because they get more control by getting to waste more time dealing with a less mature SDK¡ :no:
I'm not going to defend their practicality, but the fact of the matter is LOT (i.e., millions) of people like them and are buying them. Apple can snub their noses at these people and take a position of morally superiority, or they can address a sizable market (pun intended) where they could certainly offer a better product than their competitors. Aside from not being as portable, these larger phones function as good (or better for those with big hands and/or eyesight issues) as their smaller counterparts. For this reason, it isn't a netbook type of market that Apple should avoid.
in the same line of thinking , the new retina ipad mini could be half the resolution of the bigger retina ipad. Again, easier for devs.
That seems unlikely to me. You're talking about not doubling the resolution for the first time which results in a 1536x1152 at 1.5x which is 244 PPI. I suppose that would work for a Retina tablet but it seems like the simplest path is to just make it 2048x1536 at 326 PPI which fits into very part of the process.
I don't know whether this rumor is true, but have suspected there has been a "campaign" going on, for a while to distract and provide turbulence surrounding Apple. Competitors, and stock traders (options world) both have an interest in an atmosphere of doubt and disappointment. Not that all rumors are created by those who have agendas, but there have been some silly rumors that only appear to raise expectations (unnecessarily, and without basis).
On topic: with the 5's widescreen format and the guarantee that apps will support it with ios7, an upscale to a ~5inch screen could keep a reasonable width, and with decreased top & bottom bezels a redesign in this direction would be very apple.
Could everyone quit whining about AI and see if they can wrap their heads around the fact that apple exists in a marketplace. People do in fact see android as an alternative, and Samsung is the only other company making any money. Stories on Samsung have become relevant.
That's exactly the path that Apple took with their (expletive deleted) pixel doubling strategy to begin with. They did this to encourage development by all the developers unused to better programming.
Apple did that to support developers. They also have been whacking developers over the head about resolution independence, vector graphics and the like for a long time now at WWDC. It is the old adage about leading a horse to water but not being able to make him drink!
It's why there's ridiculous results like iPhone apps being tiny on an iPad (or jagged doubled), and black bands on the iPhone 5 to hide unused screen space.
Ahh yes but even resolution independent graphics or vector graphics wouldn't have solved all of the problems with moving to the larger screen. The reality is the massive change in screen size alters what is proper user interface design wise. That is why Apple had to offer up alternate ways to interface with the user with the release of the SDK supporting the iPad.
It reminds me of one reason that PCs took over. Everyone else was doing slower but more forward-looking screen independence, while the PC folks hardcoded for direct access to VGA screen memory and blew away customers with speed and prettiness.
Because speed matters? Frankly speed did matter back in those days.
Likewise, Apple chose the easier path of hardcoded sizes for iOS apps... something that is often cited as an "advantage" over more resolution independent apps on Android... yet is ultimately a short term solution.
The sizes aren't hard coded for iOS apps. The drawing routines are resolution independent. Apple has repeatedly advised developers to not to assume screen sizes and resolutions will remain the same. It isn't really Apples fault if developers ignore these suggestions. Now I'd be the first to admit that things where not real clear in the first couple of SDK releases but at some point Apple became very public in warning developers to to assume screen size or resolutions.
IOS developed rather quickly, as such many developers simply didn't keep up. Again this isn't Apples fault. Is the UI on iPhone perfect, of course not but it does work very well for the platform and is far better than trying to shoehorn a desktop like UI on the platform.
I also heard that the battery will be larger than the phone itself. This will increase the battery life by 100%. Oh, and it will be called the iPhone Tardis.
Samsung will counter with the Galaxy Dalek series.
That sounds like Apple is getting into the specs game, which would be silly.
I'd rather they improved battery life and/or capacity, and used elsewhere the cost savings associated with keeping the retina display as is. (They could even use it to cut prices a bit....)
Agree - Apple doesn't play specs game for the sake of it. I don't know of any reason to get into 500+ ppi territory. Not on a phone anyhow. Having said that, it would be interesting to see if/when iPhone will adopt a true 1080p display.
Battery life extension would be welcomed. But, frankly, I believe Apple needs to improve their cloud services above all else, including Mail, iCloud sync, iCloud integration with 3rd party apps (and their own), iMessage, Siri, Maps, etc. A zealot can (maybe even convincingly) argue some of these Apple services have caught up in specific ways with what other companies offer. But, overall, there are issues of reliability, user-friendliness, utility and integration friendliness that make their services second class to those of Google. As it stands, music is the only service I personally find head and shoulders superior to anything else out there.
Fixing services is far, far more important than a UI overhaul, a larger screen, a longer lasting battery, iRadio, etc.
Footnote on battery - Despite misleading reports by technorati, no smartphone has clearly superior battery performance. Someone out there will crack this nut soon and make a lot of money doing it.
I don't see the point in Apple doing this because even though the ppi is lower on the ip5 compared to other the phones, the iPhone 5 still had the best screen compared to the htc one and galaxy s4.
That seems unlikely to me. You're talking about not doubling the resolution for the first time which results in a 1536x1152 at 1.5x which is 244 PPI. I suppose that would work for a Retina tablet but it seems like the simplest path is to just make it 2048x1536 at 326 PPI which fits into very part of the process.
Not just the simplest path, but the only rational one.
I don't see the point in Apple doing this because even though the ppi is lower on the ip5 compared to other the phones, the iPhone 5 still had the best screen compared to the htc one and galaxy s4.
What does "best screen" mean?
Is that as meaningful (i.e. meaningless) as best camera, best athlete, best person, best engine, ...?
Seriously, what in the world does "best screen" mean?
Apple did that to support developers. They also have been whacking developers over the head about resolution independence, vector graphics and the like for a long time now at WWDC. It is the old adage about leading a horse to water but not being able to make him drink!
Ahh yes but even resolution independent graphics or vector graphics wouldn't have solved all of the problems with moving to the larger screen. The reality is the massive change in screen size alters what is proper user interface design wise. That is why Apple had to offer up alternate ways to interface with the user with the release of the SDK supporting the iPad.
Because speed matters? Frankly speed did matter back in those days.
The sizes aren't hard coded for iOS apps. The drawing routines are resolution independent. Apple has repeatedly advised developers to not to assume screen sizes and resolutions will remain the same. It isn't really Apples fault if developers ignore these suggestions. Now I'd be the first to admit that things where not real clear in the first couple of SDK releases but at some point Apple became very public in warning developers to to assume screen size or resolutions.
IOS developed rather quickly, as such many developers simply didn't keep up. Again this isn't Apples fault. Is the UI on iPhone perfect, of course not but it does work very well for the platform and is far better than trying to shoehorn a desktop like UI on the platform.
you are making things up. All that Apple gave it's developers prior to iOS6 was the advice to use the rectangle of [NSScreen mainScreen] rather than hard code the coordinates. Since ios6 there is auto-layout which will position the buttons relative to each other and the edge of the screen, but it does not resize the graphics as vector graphics, because the standard API ( NSImage and controls which use it) do not take in vector graphics. They take in PNGS.
(One concession is that if a dev adds the @2x.png to his image, he can use the standard NSImage loading API imagedNamed: without specifying the @2x addition, the API works it out on Retina displays)
So a universal app would need resultions for iPhone, iPhone retina, iPad and iPad retina, and iPhone 5 and iPhone 5 retina in the cases where you need to fill the iPhone 5 screen ( as in the loading Default.png screen).
What vector loading graphics do you think are part of the standard API set?
Half the time I wonder if these rumors are started solely for the purpose of raising expectations to ridiculous levels. When they prove to be untrue, gosh, Apple "failed" to meet them and must be doomed, inept, losing/lost its innovation mojo... Whatever.
No, he's not. From nearly the start they were pushing developers to think in points, not pixels. They tried hammering this long before the iPhone 4 arrived, when points and pixels were finally no longer the same value.
The standard image loaders expect pngs - at all resolutions. Apple insists that the default images on load ( the default.png) come in all resolutions. And so on.
OK so how likely is it to be a problem to have multiple default.png's?
Even if vector tools exist to create these pngs, they still need to be loaded into the resource files of the app. As non-vector graphics.
You will admit though that developers have the option to use vector graphics in their apps where they often don't? I'd be the first to admit that raster graphics have a place on any platform but even on a desktop apps you run into situations where having an image in multiple sizes makes perfect sense. In the end I really don't understand where all of this whining about Image sizes and multiple resolutions comes from. If it is a problem for a developer then they should minimize the use of such images. Seems pretty simple to me.
By the way I'm not a full time developer and the only apps written to date have been for private use. Given that I've done very useful things with out even bothering with png's. Maybe developers of commercial apps feel the need to fill every damn slot with a custom graphic but that isn't me. I'm probably one of those guys that will celebrate Ive's new flat iOS appearance but to put this simply I think many developers have this idea that more is better where I'm of the opinion that less is better.
In the end when I hear all of these noises about: "I'm a poor developer that will need to spend many a sleepless night doing more graphics work", all I can say is not my problem. The issue isn't unique to iOS either so I don't understand the issue there either.
Comments
**** you sound like paid shill! I suppose APIs and memory management are just tools for Apple to baby their shitty App Store developers, too? It's too bad iOS doesn't have great apps like you find in Google Play with those real developers that are used to programming better because they get more control by getting to waste more time dealing with a less mature SDK¡ :no:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Capt. Obvious
AGAIN with the "larger iPhone display" schtick?
Have you SEEN those larger-screen monstrosities?
Only FASHION VICTIMS need apply!
Need a bigger screen? Get an iPad.
I'm not going to defend their practicality, but the fact of the matter is LOT (i.e., millions) of people like them and are buying them. Apple can snub their noses at these people and take a position of morally superiority, or they can address a sizable market (pun intended) where they could certainly offer a better product than their competitors. Aside from not being as portable, these larger phones function as good (or better for those with big hands and/or eyesight issues) as their smaller counterparts. For this reason, it isn't a netbook type of market that Apple should avoid.
That seems unlikely to me. You're talking about not doubling the resolution for the first time which results in a 1536x1152 at 1.5x which is 244 PPI. I suppose that would work for a Retina tablet but it seems like the simplest path is to just make it 2048x1536 at 326 PPI which fits into very part of the process.
Could everyone quit whining about AI and see if they can wrap their heads around the fact that apple exists in a marketplace. People do in fact see android as an alternative, and Samsung is the only other company making any money. Stories on Samsung have become relevant.
The sizes aren't hard coded for iOS apps. The drawing routines are resolution independent. Apple has repeatedly advised developers to not to assume screen sizes and resolutions will remain the same. It isn't really Apples fault if developers ignore these suggestions. Now I'd be the first to admit that things where not real clear in the first couple of SDK releases but at some point Apple became very public in warning developers to to assume screen size or resolutions.
IOS developed rather quickly, as such many developers simply didn't keep up. Again this isn't Apples fault. Is the UI on iPhone perfect, of course not but it does work very well for the platform and is far better than trying to shoehorn a desktop like UI on the platform.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman
I also heard that the battery will be larger than the phone itself. This will increase the battery life by 100%. Oh, and it will be called the iPhone Tardis.
Samsung will counter with the Galaxy Dalek series.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
That sounds like Apple is getting into the specs game, which would be silly.
I'd rather they improved battery life and/or capacity, and used elsewhere the cost savings associated with keeping the retina display as is. (They could even use it to cut prices a bit....)
Agree - Apple doesn't play specs game for the sake of it. I don't know of any reason to get into 500+ ppi territory. Not on a phone anyhow. Having said that, it would be interesting to see if/when iPhone will adopt a true 1080p display.
Battery life extension would be welcomed. But, frankly, I believe Apple needs to improve their cloud services above all else, including Mail, iCloud sync, iCloud integration with 3rd party apps (and their own), iMessage, Siri, Maps, etc. A zealot can (maybe even convincingly) argue some of these Apple services have caught up in specific ways with what other companies offer. But, overall, there are issues of reliability, user-friendliness, utility and integration friendliness that make their services second class to those of Google. As it stands, music is the only service I personally find head and shoulders superior to anything else out there.
Fixing services is far, far more important than a UI overhaul, a larger screen, a longer lasting battery, iRadio, etc.
Footnote on battery - Despite misleading reports by technorati, no smartphone has clearly superior battery performance. Someone out there will crack this nut soon and make a lot of money doing it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
That seems unlikely to me. You're talking about not doubling the resolution for the first time which results in a 1536x1152 at 1.5x which is 244 PPI. I suppose that would work for a Retina tablet but it seems like the simplest path is to just make it 2048x1536 at 326 PPI which fits into very part of the process.
Not just the simplest path, but the only rational one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by quest01
I don't see the point in Apple doing this because even though the ppi is lower on the ip5 compared to other the phones, the iPhone 5 still had the best screen compared to the htc one and galaxy s4.
What does "best screen" mean?
Is that as meaningful (i.e. meaningless) as best camera, best athlete, best person, best engine, ...?
Seriously, what in the world does "best screen" mean?
Originally Posted by Magic_Al
Is Apple going to engage in a useless specs race? What's the point of developing resolution too fine too see?
Agreed.
This is as dumb as 4K TVs. (A 1080p TV is a "retina display" unless you're sitting too close or have super-vision.)
Completely disagreed.
Originally Posted by stelligent
Seriously, what in the world does "best screen" mean?
Highest resolution and most color accurate with the greatest field of view.
Note that all displays can be defined as retina until you're too close.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
Apple did that to support developers. They also have been whacking developers over the head about resolution independence, vector graphics and the like for a long time now at WWDC. It is the old adage about leading a horse to water but not being able to make him drink!
Ahh yes but even resolution independent graphics or vector graphics wouldn't have solved all of the problems with moving to the larger screen. The reality is the massive change in screen size alters what is proper user interface design wise. That is why Apple had to offer up alternate ways to interface with the user with the release of the SDK supporting the iPad.
Because speed matters? Frankly speed did matter back in those days.
The sizes aren't hard coded for iOS apps. The drawing routines are resolution independent. Apple has repeatedly advised developers to not to assume screen sizes and resolutions will remain the same. It isn't really Apples fault if developers ignore these suggestions. Now I'd be the first to admit that things where not real clear in the first couple of SDK releases but at some point Apple became very public in warning developers to to assume screen size or resolutions.
IOS developed rather quickly, as such many developers simply didn't keep up. Again this isn't Apples fault. Is the UI on iPhone perfect, of course not but it does work very well for the platform and is far better than trying to shoehorn a desktop like UI on the platform.
you are making things up. All that Apple gave it's developers prior to iOS6 was the advice to use the rectangle of [NSScreen mainScreen] rather than hard code the coordinates. Since ios6 there is auto-layout which will position the buttons relative to each other and the edge of the screen, but it does not resize the graphics as vector graphics, because the standard API ( NSImage and controls which use it) do not take in vector graphics. They take in PNGS.
(One concession is that if a dev adds the @2x.png to his image, he can use the standard NSImage loading API imagedNamed: without specifying the @2x addition, the API works it out on Retina displays)
So a universal app would need resultions for iPhone, iPhone retina, iPad and iPad retina, and iPhone 5 and iPhone 5 retina in the cases where you need to fill the iPhone 5 screen ( as in the loading Default.png screen).
What vector loading graphics do you think are part of the standard API set?
WebRep
currentVote
noRating
noWeight
No, he's not. From nearly the start they were pushing developers to think in points, not pixels. They tried hammering this long before the iPhone 4 arrived, when points and pixels were finally no longer the same value.
By the way I'm not a full time developer and the only apps written to date have been for private use. Given that I've done very useful things with out even bothering with png's. Maybe developers of commercial apps feel the need to fill every damn slot with a custom graphic but that isn't me. I'm probably one of those guys that will celebrate Ive's new flat iOS appearance but to put this simply I think many developers have this idea that more is better where I'm of the opinion that less is better.
In the end when I hear all of these noises about: "I'm a poor developer that will need to spend many a sleepless night doing more graphics work", all I can say is not my problem. The issue isn't unique to iOS either so I don't understand the issue there either.