Rumor: Large-screen iPhone 6 in June, 'iWatch' to use flexible LG OLED display

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 80
    Originally Posted by Jexus View Post

    Everyone says OLED!

     

    Isn’t this the second time we’ve seen that?

     

    Apple doesn’t like OLED. QD display, sure, but OLED…

  • Reply 42 of 80
    solipsismx wrote: »
    I'm referring to the years of comments since the iPhone was announced up until the time vendors had to use bigger displays to hide the bigger batteries needed to run the first generation LTE chips.

    I thought you might have been making an oblique reference to the rumors of an iPhone Nano several years ago.
  • Reply 43 of 80
    Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post

    I thought you might have been making an oblique reference to the rumors of an iPhone Nano several years ago.



    They came about partially as a result of what he’s (we’re) saying!

     

    The iPhone’s massive 3.5” screen was “too big” and it’s what made the phone “too expensive”!

     

    The solution, therefore, was a stupid phone that was smaller. But wait! If it’s smaller, there will be fewer little squares on the screen (this was before the days of apps), so we’ll have to cut something. I know! We’ll get rid of Safari, Mail, YouTube, Maps, Stocks, Weather… There we go! Now there’s enough room.

     

    Boom, iPhone nano.

     

    This is what people actually believed.

  • Reply 44 of 80
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    dasanman69 wrote: »
    Would just one more resolution make it that much harder? How many resolutions does a web developer have to account for? It makes development for Android child's play.

    How much harder depends on the app and developer so the only thing we can for sure is that it adds increased difficulty. One possible solution is to use the same PPI as the current iPhone so that other apps are bordered, not unlike with iPhone apps on the iPad in 1x, but still being the exact same virtual size across iPhone models.

    jexus wrote: »
    Everyone says OLED!

    Meanwhile I'm still here waiting for more IGZO :C

    They aren't mutually exclusive. AMOLED on an iWatch makes a lot of sense, and IGZO may be easier to mass produce on an iWatch and offer certain benefits over larger displays.

    dasanman69 wrote: »
    You could've also pointed out the time span between the iPad 3 and the 4th gen instead of simply disagreeing.

    But his comment wasn't about new HW before the next iOS update, as was the case with the iPad 3 before syncing up with the iPod and iPhone scheduling, but that there would be no iOS 8 this year because there is no evidence of it being tested so far this year.
  • Reply 45 of 80
    solipsismx wrote: »
    The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. I will be very surprised if we don't see iOS 8 until June 2015.

    I doubt we will ever see an iOS 8 — Microsoft poisoned that number for all time.
  • Reply 46 of 80
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    I doubt we will ever see an iOS 8 — Microsoft poisoned that number for all time.

    So asdasd is saying no 8th version of iOS until 2015 and you are saying it won't be named iOS 8. I'll take bets on both of those. Money goes to a charity in the other's name?
  • Reply 47 of 80
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,985member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    I'm referring to the years of comments since the iPhone was announced up until the time vendors had to use bigger displays to hide the bigger batteries needed to run the first generation LTE chips.

    Actually big screen phones were out a almost a full year before they had LTE chips. Motorola was the first to make that move and I'm still astounded how they gave up such a early lead to Samsung.
  • Reply 48 of 80
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

    Money goes to a charity in the other's name?

     

    Ooh, ooh, one of you name a charity The DEVELOPERS! Fund.

  • Reply 49 of 80
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,709member
    canukstorm wrote: »
    What's so close?

    So close to treading on troll territory. I'll give him/her the benefit of the doubt.
  • Reply 50 of 80
    imemberimember Posts: 247member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by CanukStorm View Post

     

    I wouldn't be surprised if the next generation iPhone adopts the same design language as the iPad mini / Air.


    No i am thinking will be very different design more like iPhone 3GS-iPhone 4, Apple really likes to suprise people after 3 years..also this year maybe will be the first year were both iPhone\iPad in will have a all new design 

  • Reply 51 of 80
    Next iPhone won't release in June. This rumor comes out every year and is falsified....every year.
  • Reply 52 of 80
    jungmark wrote: »
    Oh gosh. Will it never end! I doubt there will be an iPhone Phablet. The < 5" iphone seems feasible as long as it complements a new 4" iPhone.

    iPhone X 4"
    iPhone X+ < 5"
  • Reply 53 of 80

    Apple would be smart & have bases covered with 4" & 5" iPhones.

    I'd prefer a 6" iPhone but doubt Apple will make as it would cannibalize iPads
  • Reply 54 of 80
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post



    That concept phone is hideous. IF Apple is making a larger phone then they need to rethink the UI. I'm not sure rows and rows of apps/folders is the way to go. Have a place to go where I can see all my apps in alphabetic order or grouped by app type. But then make the home screen more customizable. Do it on the iPad too.

     

    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post





    All OS evolve over time. However row and columns of app icons isn't a high priority for retro fit in my mind. Many things need to be overhauled in IOS. I would put the interface very low on any list Apple might have.

    Well that is where file system access comes into play. I'm not sure we will ever see a "Finder" like interface in iOS though I'd love to see at least a limited capability.


     

    Rogifan's proposal sounds a lot like Android's method of organizing apps using a homescreen for commonly used apps and an app drawer to hold all the rest. No need to expose a full-blown file system.

  • Reply 55 of 80
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,709member
    Apple would be smart & have bases covered with 4" & 5" iPhones.

    I'd prefer a 6" iPhone but doubt Apple will make as it would cannibalize iPads

    Apple isn't afraid of cannibalizing itself but only if it makes sense. A Phablet doesn't make sense (or cents).
  • Reply 56 of 80
    d4njvrzf wrote: »
    Android's method of organizing apps using a homescreen for commonly used apps and an app drawer to hold all the rest.

    Actually, they're in the draw as well. The home screen has shortcuts to the apps. As far as the apple paradigm is concerned, the apps on the homescreen are the apps, so there will never be a shortcut system to replace it. Imagine if /Applications was full of Aliases to apps and the actual apps were all hidden in /Library/Application Support or whatever. Apple aimed to destroy that windows-esque notion. Android only goes halfway.

    I've played with Samsungs, HTCs and their "homescreens" are a joke. If they really wanted what they say they are aiming for, interface wise and not just finding a way of differentiating from apple to save themselves lawsuits, they would have two homescreens or tabs. A scrollable list of apps on the left, rearrangable, filterable, techy list shit and a scrollable column of widgets on the right! Do you know how hard it is to delete and rearrange stuff on these things? No non-techie would manage it.

    Their current systems are horrible and serve no discernible purpose other than my iphone friends go unlock>homescreen>app>interact/play>homescreen/multitask>app>etc whereas my android friends all just go horrific-unlock-screen>Playaroundwithhomescreens>lock>unlock>facebook>homescreens>lock>etc because their phones are not utilities, they're all fluff.

    Their homescreens make them look busy and full of useful stuff, but we know from app sales and usage stats that they're, for the most-part, really not.
  • Reply 57 of 80
    dunksdunks Posts: 1,240member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    ...Does going from 326 PPI to 277 PIP in a 4.7" display still make it Retina? That would mean it would need to be held 12.4" from the eyes for someone with 20/20(6/6) vision for the effect to be achieved at its minimum...

     

     

    But that's not really what "retina" was about. The real magic behind retina was the 4x increase in pixels so that it was fully backwards compatible. It was the most optimal transition possible because it made retina aware apps look great and non-retina aware apps looked no worse than they did before. The whole "indistinguishable pixels" thing was only even just marketing to package the concept. I have always been able to distinguish the pixels on iOS devices, though the enhancements are obvious for typography.

     

    I'd like to see a larger display, particularly if that extra surface area went into making the battery capacity, but resolution is ultimately more important than display size.

  • Reply 58 of 80
    Instead of competing on specs, Apple focused on getting the core experience right. Why do we seem to forget this?
  • Reply 59 of 80
    sennensennen Posts: 1,466member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post





    Actually big screen phones were out a almost a full year before they had LTE chips. Motorola was the first to make that move and I'm still astounded how they gave up such a early lead to Samsung.

     

    They still went to the larger, lower quality screens simply because they couldn't get the performance/battery life/heat issue sorted, however.

  • Reply 60 of 80

    Ah, they post stuff like this every time the "site engagement" stats start to sag.

Sign In or Register to comment.