These look nothing like the HTC One or the iPhone 6 mockup...
Ohmy … that first gen iPhone looks so sexy! I really like the 3.5" form factor. It is perfect. Here's hoping Apple manages to get rid of the home button in favor of a bigger (4"?) screen without increasing the size of the 4S. Otherwise the 3.5" screen is great as well. I don't need a jumbo phone.
Ohmy … that first gen iPhone looks so sexy! I really like the 3.5" form factor. It is perfect. Here's hoping Apple manages to get rid of the home button in favor of a bigger (4"?) screen without increasing the size of the 4S. Otherwise the 3.5" screen is great as well. I don't need a jumbo phone.
Nooooo, the physical home button is essential.
Unlike many of its Android competitors, that button allows the user to instantly, by feel alone, wake the device, return to the home screen, capture a screen grab, unlock using TouchId, activate the app switcher, etc. It will be a sad day if Apple ever gets rid of it.
Unlike many of its Android competitors, that button allows the user to instantly, by feel alone, wake the device, return to the home screen, capture a screen grab, unlock using TouchId, activate the app switcher, etc. It will be a sad day if Apple ever gets rid of it.
I don't necessarily agree that a physical button is necessary to accomplish those things, but assuming one accepts the premise -- fine, put the button along the edge like the power and volume buttons.
I don't necessarily agree that a physical button is necessary to accomplish those things, but assuming one accepts the premise -- fine, put the button along the edge like the power and volume buttons.
Absolutely - you can do a home button in that way quite effectively. And it makes sense to further minimise the design and take other things off the screen.
Not sure how this would impact the Touch ID stuff, but they would obviously consider that as part of the design anyway.
Absolutely - you can do a home button in that way quite effectively. And it makes sense to further minimise the design and take other things off the screen.
Not sure how this would impact the Touch ID stuff, but they would obviously consider that as part of the design anyway.
With the growing tension between the desire for larger displays and the need to keep smartphones pocketable, I suppose nothing is sacred. However I doubt Apple will abandon the home button's current placement any time soon. Not a designer here, but to me it seems like one of their most iconic design elements - simplicity and functionality at its best..
Immediately obvious to the user by sight and touch
Stands out as the device's initial primary interface
"Disappears" into the background during normal operation
Easily and consistently operated with any hand without changing your grip
Performs multiple secondary roles
I think this button's appearance, placement and function are a key reason why iOS devices are so easy for anyone to learn to use. First thing you tell a new user? "If you get lost, just click the home button".
Seems to me that moving this to the side just to make more room for the display would be a huge step back from a purely design viewpoint. I suspect Jonny Ive would not allow it unless he came up with something truly better - rather than just mimicking competing products' utilitarian designs.
Seems to me that moving this to the side just to make more room for the display would be a huge step back from a purely design viewpoint. I suspect Jonny Ive would not allow it unless he came up with something truly better - rather than just mimicking competing products' utilitarian designs.
I think the first thing to say is that the Home Button (as it is now) was a bit of a compromise. From memory, Steve Jobs wanted to essentially have a "buttonless" device and the home button was a concession to functionality over form (not a bad concession we'd probably mostly agree).
The ultimate question is really "what could replace the function of the Home Button?" Moving it to the side is possible (and I don't believe it mimmicks other designs - if anything, most phones probably have too many buttons on the face of the device as-is), but it's not necessarily the only way. It depends what you do when you move it to the side, as well (we are making the assumption that a typical switch or button would be used for example).
In any case, I think that the bigger challenge is really the Touch ID sensor and how that would be managed. Apple don't want to sacrifice the great functionality they have around that one.
I think the first thing to say is that the Home Button (as it is now) was a bit of a compromise. From memory, Steve Jobs wanted to essentially have a "buttonless" device and the home button was a concession to functionality over form (not a bad concession we'd probably mostly agree).
The ultimate question is really "what could replace the function of the Home Button?" Moving it to the side is possible (and I don't believe it mimmicks other designs - if anything, most phones probably have too many buttons on the face of the device as-is), but it's not necessarily the only way. It depends what you do when you move it to the side, as well (we are making the assumption that a typical switch or button would be used for example).
In any case, I think that the bigger challenge is really the Touch ID sensor and how that would be managed. Apple don't want to sacrifice the great functionality they have around that one.
We'll see, I guess.
Well, Apple does have some recent patents that hint at some of the possibilities:
fingerprint detection from any location on the screen
I would be more enthusiastic about removing the dedicated home button if its function could be duplicated anywhere on the display by detecting a specific type of touch event with a vibration effect to provide tactile feedback and mimic the feel of a button click.
This could result in a larger display without significantly increasing the size of the phone...
Incidentally, I don't see how Apple could make a phone with a seamless, all-metal housing as shown in this rendering. There needs to be a non-metallic port for the radio.
fingerprint detection from any location on the screen
pressure sensitive touch input detection
use of an actuator to mimic tactile feedback & replace click button
And yet none of these actually solves the problem the Home Button exists to solve.
I would be more enthusiastic about removing the dedicated home button if its function could be duplicated anywhere on the display by detecting a specific type of touch event with a vibration effect to provide tactile feedback and mimic the feel of a button click.
A specific type of touch? Do you expect the average user to know or care about that? “WHY AM I BEING KICKED OUT OF MY APP APPLE SUCKS.”
Incidentally, I don't see how Apple could make a phone with a seamless, all-metal housing as shown in this rendering. There needs to be a non-metallic port for the radio.
Where don’t you see a seam? The front glass is all one piece, connected to the back. It’s rimmed by a black something or other; that’d be it.
And yet none of these actually solves the problem the Home Button exists to solve.
A specific type of touch? Do you expect the average user to know or care about that? “WHY AM I BEING KICKED OUT OF MY APP APPLE SUCKS.”
Again as far as I'm concerned, the current home button is best... just throwing some ideas out there to counter the suggestion of "simply" moving the home button to the side of the phone. If anyone can figure out a good solution along the lines I suggested, though, it would be Apple.
Quote:
Where don’t you see a seam? The front glass is all one piece, connected to the back. It’s rimmed by a black something or other; that’d be it.
Name a single Apple device to date that has cellular connectivity with an all metal back. Every iPhone and cellular-equipped iPad ever made has had some glass or plastic on the back for wireless reception.
Name a single Apple device to date that has cellular connectivity with an all metal back. Every iPhone and cellular-equipped iPad ever made has had some glass or plastic on the back for wireless reception.
And I’ve never understood that. Is glass radio transparent, too? Why can’t the front serve for that?
And I’ve never understood that. Is glass radio transparent, too? Why can’t the front serve for that?
I assume it could, but remember there is a metal mesh, perhaps a couple of them, for the display and touch matrix that could interfere with the signal. I'm not sure if the backlight would cause any interference.
I guess they could use the glass at the top (or bottom) but perhaps they do but it needs more than one side of the iPad for it work properly in all conditions.
And I’ve never understood that. Is glass radio transparent, too? Why can’t the front serve for that?
I'm certain this is the only reason their devices have never had seamless backs. I do believe glass is radio transparent, and I suspect the reason not to point the signal to the front is to avoid blasting your brain with electromagnetic radiation.
Your cellphone is killing you: What people don’t want you to know about electromagnetic fields
The article clearly states that while we don't have enough data yet, there is ample, peer-reviewed research suggesting EMF could negatively impact health over time. If you're aware of similarly peer-reviewed research suggesting otherwise I'd be curious to see it.
….there is ample, peer-reviewed research suggesting EMF could negatively impact health over time.
And that’s supposed to make me believe it?
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a component of the World Health Organization, has recently classified radiofrequency fields as “possibly carcinogenic to humans,” based on limited evidence from human studies, limited evidence from studies of radiofrequency energy and cancer in rodents, and weak mechanistic evidence (from studies of genotoxicity, effects on immune system function, gene and protein expression, cell signaling, oxidative stress, and apoptosis, along with studies of the possible effects of radiofrequency energy on the blood-brain barrier).
The American Cancer Society (ACS) states that the IARC classification means that there could be some risk associated with cancer, but the evidence is not strong enough to be considered causal and needs to be investigated further. Individuals who are concerned about radiofrequency exposure can limit their exposure, including using an ear piece and limiting cell phone use, particularly among children.
The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) states that the weight of the current scientific evidence has not conclusively linked cell phone use with any adverse health problems, but more research is needed.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which is responsible for regulating the safety of machines and devices that emit radiation (including cell phones), notes that studies reporting biological changes associated with radiofrequency energy have failed to be replicated and that the majority of human epidemiologic studies have failed to show a relationship between exposure to radiofrequency energy from cell phones and health problems.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) states that, although some studies have raised concerns about the possible risks of cell phone use, scientific research as a whole does not support a statistically significant association between cell phone use and health effects.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) concludes that there is no scientific evidence that proves that wireless phone use can lead to cancer or to other health problems, including headaches, dizziness, or memory loss.
Nothing there disputes what the article said. Not enough is known, there is cause for concern, but more data is needed. I'm not wearing a tin foil hat and I regularly use my smartphone, but it doesn't surprise me that Apple would avoid directing their phone's radio transmission at the user's face.
Comments
These look nothing like the HTC One or the iPhone 6 mockup...
Ohmy … that first gen iPhone looks so sexy! I really like the 3.5" form factor. It is perfect. Here's hoping Apple manages to get rid of the home button in favor of a bigger (4"?) screen without increasing the size of the 4S. Otherwise the 3.5" screen is great as well. I don't need a jumbo phone.
Ohmy … that first gen iPhone looks so sexy! I really like the 3.5" form factor. It is perfect. Here's hoping Apple manages to get rid of the home button in favor of a bigger (4"?) screen without increasing the size of the 4S. Otherwise the 3.5" screen is great as well. I don't need a jumbo phone.
Unlike many of its Android competitors, that button allows the user to instantly, by feel alone, wake the device, return to the home screen, capture a screen grab, unlock using TouchId, activate the app switcher, etc. It will be a sad day if Apple ever gets rid of it.
Unlike many of its Android competitors, that button allows the user to instantly, by feel alone, wake the device, return to the home screen, capture a screen grab, unlock using TouchId, activate the app switcher, etc. It will be a sad day if Apple ever gets rid of it.
I don't necessarily agree that a physical button is necessary to accomplish those things, but assuming one accepts the premise -- fine, put the button along the edge like the power and volume buttons.
I don't necessarily agree that a physical button is necessary to accomplish those things, but assuming one accepts the premise -- fine, put the button along the edge like the power and volume buttons.
Absolutely - you can do a home button in that way quite effectively. And it makes sense to further minimise the design and take other things off the screen.
Not sure how this would impact the Touch ID stuff, but they would obviously consider that as part of the design anyway.
I seriously hope there is more to iPhone 6 and iOS 8 than "health book" and a bigger screen.
That larger canvas offers so much potential for new levels of interactivity and productivity.
...like being able to see two two apps to avoid the annoying as hell app reloading when trying to multitask and share information between apps.
Huh? You want a bigger screen but when multitasking it's ok to use only half of that larger screen. I don't understand your reasoning...
...like being able to see two two apps to avoid the annoying as hell app reloading when trying to multitask and share information between apps.
What "reloading"?
You double tap the home button and select the App you want to switch to, which opens at exactly the same point you closed it at.
It seems you don't know how iOS works.
Absolutely - you can do a home button in that way quite effectively. And it makes sense to further minimise the design and take other things off the screen.
Not sure how this would impact the Touch ID stuff, but they would obviously consider that as part of the design anyway.
With the growing tension between the desire for larger displays and the need to keep smartphones pocketable, I suppose nothing is sacred. However I doubt Apple will abandon the home button's current placement any time soon. Not a designer here, but to me it seems like one of their most iconic design elements - simplicity and functionality at its best..
I think this button's appearance, placement and function are a key reason why iOS devices are so easy for anyone to learn to use. First thing you tell a new user? "If you get lost, just click the home button".
Seems to me that moving this to the side just to make more room for the display would be a huge step back from a purely design viewpoint. I suspect Jonny Ive would not allow it unless he came up with something truly better - rather than just mimicking competing products' utilitarian designs.
Iphone 6 is my favourite..!
Seems to me that moving this to the side just to make more room for the display would be a huge step back from a purely design viewpoint. I suspect Jonny Ive would not allow it unless he came up with something truly better - rather than just mimicking competing products' utilitarian designs.
I think the first thing to say is that the Home Button (as it is now) was a bit of a compromise. From memory, Steve Jobs wanted to essentially have a "buttonless" device and the home button was a concession to functionality over form (not a bad concession we'd probably mostly agree).
The ultimate question is really "what could replace the function of the Home Button?" Moving it to the side is possible (and I don't believe it mimmicks other designs - if anything, most phones probably have too many buttons on the face of the device as-is), but it's not necessarily the only way. It depends what you do when you move it to the side, as well (we are making the assumption that a typical switch or button would be used for example).
In any case, I think that the bigger challenge is really the Touch ID sensor and how that would be managed. Apple don't want to sacrifice the great functionality they have around that one.
We'll see, I guess.
I think the first thing to say is that the Home Button (as it is now) was a bit of a compromise. From memory, Steve Jobs wanted to essentially have a "buttonless" device and the home button was a concession to functionality over form (not a bad concession we'd probably mostly agree).
The ultimate question is really "what could replace the function of the Home Button?" Moving it to the side is possible (and I don't believe it mimmicks other designs - if anything, most phones probably have too many buttons on the face of the device as-is), but it's not necessarily the only way. It depends what you do when you move it to the side, as well (we are making the assumption that a typical switch or button would be used for example).
In any case, I think that the bigger challenge is really the Touch ID sensor and how that would be managed. Apple don't want to sacrifice the great functionality they have around that one.
We'll see, I guess.
Well, Apple does have some recent patents that hint at some of the possibilities:
http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/07/18/apple-details-in-display-fingerprint-sensor-tech-in-patent-filing-from-authentec-cofounder
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/04/03/apples-new-touchscreen-tech-uses-infrared-light-to-discern-force
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/01/21/apples-new-trackpad-patent-replaces-click-button-with-force-sensors-adds-tactile-feedback
I would be more enthusiastic about removing the dedicated home button if its function could be duplicated anywhere on the display by detecting a specific type of touch event with a vibration effect to provide tactile feedback and mimic the feel of a button click.
This could result in a larger display without significantly increasing the size of the phone...
Incidentally, I don't see how Apple could make a phone with a seamless, all-metal housing as shown in this rendering. There needs to be a non-metallic port for the radio.
And yet none of these actually solves the problem the Home Button exists to solve.
A specific type of touch? Do you expect the average user to know or care about that? “WHY AM I BEING KICKED OUT OF MY APP APPLE SUCKS.”
Where don’t you see a seam? The front glass is all one piece, connected to the back. It’s rimmed by a black something or other; that’d be it.
And yet none of these actually solves the problem the Home Button exists to solve.
A specific type of touch? Do you expect the average user to know or care about that? “WHY AM I BEING KICKED OUT OF MY APP APPLE SUCKS.”
Again as far as I'm concerned, the current home button is best... just throwing some ideas out there to counter the suggestion of "simply" moving the home button to the side of the phone. If anyone can figure out a good solution along the lines I suggested, though, it would be Apple.
Quote:
Where don’t you see a seam? The front glass is all one piece, connected to the back. It’s rimmed by a black something or other; that’d be it.
Name a single Apple device to date that has cellular connectivity with an all metal back. Every iPhone and cellular-equipped iPad ever made has had some glass or plastic on the back for wireless reception.
Name a single Apple device to date that has cellular connectivity with an all metal back. Every iPhone and cellular-equipped iPad ever made has had some glass or plastic on the back for wireless reception.
And I’ve never understood that. Is glass radio transparent, too? Why can’t the front serve for that?
I assume it could, but remember there is a metal mesh, perhaps a couple of them, for the display and touch matrix that could interfere with the signal. I'm not sure if the backlight would cause any interference.
I guess they could use the glass at the top (or bottom) but perhaps they do but it needs more than one side of the iPad for it work properly in all conditions.
And I’ve never understood that. Is glass radio transparent, too? Why can’t the front serve for that?
I'm certain this is the only reason their devices have never had seamless backs. I do believe glass is radio transparent, and I suspect the reason not to point the signal to the front is to avoid blasting your brain with electromagnetic radiation.
Your cellphone is killing you: What people don’t want you to know about electromagnetic fields
http://www.salon.com/2014/04/12/your_cellphone_is_killing_you_what_people_dont_want_you_to_know_about_electromagnetic_fields/
Your cellphone is killing you: What people don’t want you to know about electromagnetic fields
http://www.salon.com/2014/04/12/your_cellphone_is_killing_you_what_people_dont_want_you_to_know_about_electromagnetic_fields/
Pseudoscientific hokum.
Pseudoscientific hokum.
Really, just like climate change, huh?
The article clearly states that while we don't have enough data yet, there is ample, peer-reviewed research suggesting EMF could negatively impact health over time. If you're aware of similarly peer-reviewed research suggesting otherwise I'd be curious to see it.
….there is ample, peer-reviewed research suggesting EMF could negatively impact health over time.
And that’s supposed to make me believe it?
The American Cancer Society
(ACS) states that the IARC classification means that there could be some risk associated with cancer, but the evidence is not strong enough to be considered causal and needs to be investigated further. Individuals who are concerned about radiofrequency exposure can limit their exposure, including using an ear piece and limiting cell phone use, particularly among children.
The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) states that the weight of the current scientific evidence has not conclusively linked cell phone use with any adverse health problems, but more research is needed.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which is responsible for regulating the safety of machines and devices that emit radiation (including cell phones), notes that studies reporting biological changes associated with radiofrequency energy have failed to be replicated and that the majority of human epidemiologic studies have failed to show a relationship between exposure to radiofrequency energy from cell phones and health problems.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) states that, although some studies have raised concerns about the possible risks of cell phone use, scientific research as a whole does not support a statistically significant association between cell phone use and health effects.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) concludes that there is no scientific evidence that proves that wireless phone use can lead to cancer or to other health problems, including headaches, dizziness, or memory loss.
I bet you can feel Wi-Fi, too.
And that’s supposed to make me believe it?
I bet you can feel Wi-Fi, too.
Nothing there disputes what the article said. Not enough is known, there is cause for concern, but more data is needed. I'm not wearing a tin foil hat and I regularly use my smartphone, but it doesn't surprise me that Apple would avoid directing their phone's radio transmission at the user's face.