1) I could see Apple doing that and I don't expect a significantly larger iPhone that is sold along with a new 4" iPhone to be the same price or cheaper than the 4" flagship. I could make an argument for why they might do that but I think it's highly unlikely. I think they'd probably make it $100 more expensive like with the iPad line, and I could see double the capacity as being one way to account for the price jump.
2) So no capacity bump if they keep a 4" iPhone? How about an option for a 128GB model?
I agree we are certainly due a 128GB model, even if the display size remains 4".
I merely answered a question about what advantages the 4" display brought and that is an advantage. In addition, the 4" display allowed Apple to go bigger in only one dimension, lessening the impact of needed changes to apps. I do think Apple wanted to shift to the 16:9 aspect ratio and the iPhone 5 was their opportunity to do that. We'll see that aspect ratio remain in future iPhones with larger displays.
That change also helps them now if they do make a larger iPhone that increases in both dimensions. They couldn't have an iPhone 4.5" before that was 3:2. That would be way too wide.
We've heard that every… single… year since LTE-based phones tried to one-up the iPhone but were forced to then use a larger display to hide the larger components and battery.
I’m sick of innovation. Apple needs to outovate. Outovation or I’ll buy [full product name] from [full company name], since [verbatim product tagline].
I was wondering how big would an iPhone display be if Apple doubled the current 1136x640 pixel count in both dimensions (like they did to create the iPad Retina) and then used an existing display technology that offers higher resolution than the 326 pixels per inch resolution of the current iPhones. LG, one of the three suppliers of displays to Apple, has recently developed a 538 pixels per inch display. And it’s an LCD panel, which Apple prefers for excellent color saturation.
Doubling the iPhones' 1136x640 pixel count in each dimension results in 2272x1280 pixels. That pixel count at 538 pixels per inch produces a display that is 4.22" tall by 2.38" wide with a 4.85" diagonal measurement, which sounds like a pretty good compromise between a too small display and a too large [phablet] display. The current iPhone is 2.31" wide. If Apple were to extend this display side-edge to side-edge, using software numbing to ignore touches at the side edges, thus creating a virtual bezel, it would need to make the iPhone less than 1/10th of an inch wider, allowing it to maintain its claim of a handset that perfectly fits the hand.
That change also helps them now if they do make a larger iPhone that increases in both dimensions. They couldn't have an iPhone 4.5" before that was 3:2. That would be way too wide.
We're thinking along the same lines. See my most recent post.
The 4" display changed the aspect ratio from the 3.5" displays 3:2 to 16:9. This was an important change for viewing HD video; notice how none of the 4" display is letterboxed versus the intrusive letter boxing on the iPhone 4/4S 3.5" display.
I don't seem to recall too many people, if any, bitching about letter boxing on the 4/4S before the 5 came out.
I merely answered a question about what advantages the 4" display brought and that is an advantage. In addition, the 4" display allowed Apple to go bigger in only one dimension, lessening the impact of needed changes to apps. I do think Apple wanted to shift to the 16:9 aspect ratio and the iPhone 5 was their opportunity to do that. We'll see that aspect ratio remain in future iPhones with larger displays.
The trouble being that I wasn't talking about advantages.
Same number, too? I have a free number setup specifically to give on everyone-whom-isn't-a-friend-or-relative that will auto-forward to my cell. I wasn't aware of a technique to have someone call you at your cell which then reroutes over IP and then calls your cell in another country with local charges (unless I'm misunderstanding which I think is very likely).
You're correct, I misspoke. One can't forward their GV number to a international phone.
But they may not be limiting themselves to one handed operation. I completely see what Sol is saying but I am wondering if the market hasn't changed over the years and there are many people for whom the iPhone will be their only computer, specially in the Asian market.
And that is the correct question to ask in my opinion. You don't start with what size the screen should be, you start with what role the device plays these days and then deduce the screen size from that.
This is exactly the point. In Asia big screens have wiped out a large part of the iPhone user base because people don't have the room in their 600sqft apartments for even a laptop. They have one big screen phone and that's it.
Whether people here are mature enough or not to accept it, Apple is selling phones that are too small for Asia.
This is exactly the point. In Asia big screens have wiped out a large part of the iPhone user base because people don't have the room in their 600sqft apartments for even a laptop. They have one big screen phone and that's it.
Whether people here are mature enough or not to accept it, Apple is selling phones that are too small for Asia.
And that’s just exaggerated nonsense. You don’t need to be mature to see it.
[B]Lerxt[/B], I'm pretty sure that we'll see why Apple took so long to manufacture larger-screened phones—if they do it that is, and many signs point that way now.
We all know this story: Tim Cook said he wouldn't rule it out, but only if they could do it without tradeoffs. To me, that means no weight gain, no loss in battery life, and higher pixel density, all of which depend on new LCD fabs built around LTPS or IGZO. There is simply no other way they could do it. Oh, and they probably will need the next generation SoC and graphics processors.
I do wish this fundamental understanding was common around here, so we wouldn't have to keep going back over it. Not singling you out; nobody seems to keep it in mind.
For Japan, we can only hope Apple keeps alive the iPhone 5s. Anything larger may bomb [...]
If Apple really cared about the Japanese market, they would have kept a smaller iMac available, as even the 21-incher is way too big for most Japanese desks.
People I know at Apple Japan have been complaining for years/decades that Cupertino never listens to them.
If Apple really cared about the Japanese market, they would have kept a smaller iMac available, as even the 21-incher is way too big for most Japanese desks.
And there you go again with this nonsense. Even in Miura’s tiny apartment, she has room for one.
Yes, I’m using a cartoon as reference; he takes his settings from photographs.
People I know at Apple Japan have been complaining for years/decades that Cupertino never listens to them.
Maybe that’s because they don’t represent anything Apple cares about?
If Apple really cared about the Japanese market, they would have kept a smaller iMac available, as even the 21-incher is way too big for most Japanese desks.
People I know at Apple Japan have been complaining for years/decades that Cupertino never listens to them.
I don't doubt there are some people in Japan that would want a smaller iMac but we're talking about the iMac. It's already not a huge seller in any part of the world compared to their notebooks. If you're rely cramped for space then buy a notebook or if you really want a Mac desktop with a 21" display then Mac mini and some other vendor's monitor. Your complaint is specific to you that even if "all your friends agree with you" you're still talking about a small number of people.
Comments
1) I could see Apple doing that and I don't expect a significantly larger iPhone that is sold along with a new 4" iPhone to be the same price or cheaper than the 4" flagship. I could make an argument for why they might do that but I think it's highly unlikely. I think they'd probably make it $100 more expensive like with the iPad line, and I could see double the capacity as being one way to account for the price jump.
2) So no capacity bump if they keep a 4" iPhone? How about an option for a 128GB model?
I agree we are certainly due a 128GB model, even if the display size remains 4".
That change also helps them now if they do make a larger iPhone that increases in both dimensions. They couldn't have an iPhone 4.5" before that was 3:2. That would be way too wide.
I’m sick of innovation. Apple needs to outovate. Outovation or I’ll buy [full product name] from [full company name], since [verbatim product tagline].
Haven't people been saying that for 3+ years now? I guess it'll be true some day.
I was wondering how big would an iPhone display be if Apple doubled the current 1136x640 pixel count in both dimensions (like they did to create the iPad Retina) and then used an existing display technology that offers higher resolution than the 326 pixels per inch resolution of the current iPhones. LG, one of the three suppliers of displays to Apple, has recently developed a 538 pixels per inch display. And it’s an LCD panel, which Apple prefers for excellent color saturation.
Doubling the iPhones' 1136x640 pixel count in each dimension results in 2272x1280 pixels. That pixel count at 538 pixels per inch produces a display that is 4.22" tall by 2.38" wide with a 4.85" diagonal measurement, which sounds like a pretty good compromise between a too small display and a too large [phablet] display. The current iPhone is 2.31" wide. If Apple were to extend this display side-edge to side-edge, using software numbing to ignore touches at the side edges, thus creating a virtual bezel, it would need to make the iPhone less than 1/10th of an inch wider, allowing it to maintain its claim of a handset that perfectly fits the hand.
That change also helps them now if they do make a larger iPhone that increases in both dimensions. They couldn't have an iPhone 4.5" before that was 3:2. That would be way too wide.
We're thinking along the same lines. See my most recent post.
They’d have to double the size in each direction for that to mean anything to anyone.
The 4" display changed the aspect ratio from the 3.5" displays 3:2 to 16:9. This was an important change for viewing HD video; notice how none of the 4" display is letterboxed versus the intrusive letter boxing on the iPhone 4/4S 3.5" display.
I don't seem to recall too many people, if any, bitching about letter boxing on the 4/4S before the 5 came out.
I merely answered a question about what advantages the 4" display brought and that is an advantage. In addition, the 4" display allowed Apple to go bigger in only one dimension, lessening the impact of needed changes to apps. I do think Apple wanted to shift to the 16:9 aspect ratio and the iPhone 5 was their opportunity to do that. We'll see that aspect ratio remain in future iPhones with larger displays.
The trouble being that I wasn't talking about advantages.
You're correct, I misspoke. One can't forward their GV number to a international phone.
That's too bad. It would be nice to have a way to have a number switch how it get rerouted in the most cost efficient manner as needed.
The information I found stated that it can't 'yet', so there's still hope that it will be possible in the near future.
But they may not be limiting themselves to one handed operation. I completely see what Sol is saying but I am wondering if the market hasn't changed over the years and there are many people for whom the iPhone will be their only computer, specially in the Asian market.
And that is the correct question to ask in my opinion. You don't start with what size the screen should be, you start with what role the device plays these days and then deduce the screen size from that.
Whether people here are mature enough or not to accept it, Apple is selling phones that are too small for Asia.
Whether people here are mature enough or not to accept it, Apple is selling phones that are too small for Asia.
And that’s just exaggerated nonsense. You don’t need to be mature to see it.
We all know this story: Tim Cook said he wouldn't rule it out, but only if they could do it without tradeoffs. To me, that means no weight gain, no loss in battery life, and higher pixel density, all of which depend on new LCD fabs built around LTPS or IGZO. There is simply no other way they could do it. Oh, and they probably will need the next generation SoC and graphics processors.
I do wish this fundamental understanding was common around here, so we wouldn't have to keep going back over it. Not singling you out; nobody seems to keep it in mind.
If Apple really cared about the Japanese market, they would have kept a smaller iMac available, as even the 21-incher is way too big for most Japanese desks.
People I know at Apple Japan have been complaining for years/decades that Cupertino never listens to them.
And there you go again with this nonsense. Even in Miura’s tiny apartment, she has room for one.
Yes, I’m using a cartoon as reference; he takes his settings from photographs.
Maybe that’s because they don’t represent anything Apple cares about?
I don't doubt there are some people in Japan that would want a smaller iMac but we're talking about the iMac. It's already not a huge seller in any part of the world compared to their notebooks. If you're rely cramped for space then buy a notebook or if you really want a Mac desktop with a 21" display then Mac mini and some other vendor's monitor. Your complaint is specific to you that even if "all your friends agree with you" you're still talking about a small number of people.