Print 100 comment(s) - last by marsax2014.. on May 21 at 10:41 AM

Apple will use 3x scaling to achieve its new resolution for the iPhone 6

9to5 Mac usually has a pretty reliable track record when it comes to Apple rumors, and the latest report from the site claims that the upcoming flagship iPhone 6 will get a significant boost in display resolution. Apple will reportedly increase the device’s screen resolution to 1704x960, stopping short of Full HD (1920x1080) resolutions supported by its current competition and the QHD (2560x1440) resolution touted by Toshiba Display.
According to 9to5 Mac, the iPhone 5/iPhone 5c/iPhone 5s have a base resolution of 568x320, however, there are twice as many pixels on the horizontal and vertical axis giving a 2x “Retina” display of 1136x640. The iPhone 6, on the other hand, is said to feature a 3x Retina display, tripling the 568x320 base resolution. That’s how the reported 1704x960 display is achieved. With a display measuring 4.7" diagonally, the iPhone 6 would ring in at 416 pixels per inch (PPI).

9to5 Mac's mockup shows how the iPhone 6's 4.7" display would stackup against the iPhone 5s [Image Source: 9to5 Mac]
This revelation lines up with the all of the previous leaks that suggest that the iPhone 6 will retain its 16:9 display ratio; and it would also make backwards compatibility with existing applications an easier affair.
As for what Apple plans to do with the increased screen resolution, 9to5 Mac’s source suggest:
Core user interface elements, from iOS functions like the Home screen, Notification Center, and Settings panels, will simply appear like larger versions of those functions on the current iPhone display. However, sources also say it is likely that developers and Apple itself will be able to optimize some applications to better utilize the larger screen area.
Apple’s iPhone 6 will need some serious horsepower to fuel the 1704x960 display, so we expect to see the new A8 processor paired with at least 2GB of RAM (all of Apple’s current flagship iOS devices ship with only 1GB of RAM). And if history serves as any indication, we should expect to see Imagination Technologies’ PowerVR 6 Series XT chips handling graphics duties or something even more powerful.

Source: 9to5 Mac

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

damn it!
By BRB29 on 5/14/14, Rating: 0
RE: damn it!
By michael2k on 5/14/14, Rating: -1
RE: damn it!
By Da W on 5/14/14, Rating: 0
RE: damn it!
By Argon18 on 5/14/14, Rating: 0
RE: damn it!
By peterrushkin on 5/14/2014 6:21:52 PM , Rating: 2
He like everyone else, feels his comment has merit :)

RE: damn it!
By Paulette69 on 5/14/2014 6:50:44 PM , Rating: 2
So then he does care, and quite a bit apparently :)

RE: damn it!
By bupkus on 5/15/2014 8:41:01 AM , Rating: 2
Perhaps it's more of a personal statement about a sociological/technical state than about his caring about caring.

RE: damn it!
By maugrimtr on 5/16/2014 7:31:18 AM , Rating: 2
Personally, I can't wait to buy another overpriced phone... Maybe they'll let me have a similarly overpriced set of headphones from Dr. Dre? Then I can get in my overpriced car, speed around the place to buy overpriced everything else, and be completely satisfied with being so damn stylish! :P

I thought the point of Retina was that on such a small screen, the naked eye can only discern so many pixels? This whole resolution race is beyond ridiculous and we're all paying for it gleefully?

RE: damn it!
By Reclaimer77 on 5/16/2014 8:48:18 AM , Rating: 2
You know "Retina" is marketing speak, right? It has nothing to do with an upper limit of discernible PPI or image quality.

Steve Jobs or whoever just used it because it sounded cool and spongebrained iTards would lap it up like candy.

RE: damn it!
By retrospooty on 5/16/2014 11:18:00 AM , Rating: 1
Even from Apple's own defintion of their marketing term it is for "average" vision. From there, distance is subjective, and distance highly effects it... "Retina" is a point where the "average" vision cannot distinguish individual pixels at any given distance - for the iPhone they targets 12-15 inches from face... I have held iPhone s,5,5s 12-15 inches from my face and I can make out pixels, but I have always had really good eyesight.

The fact of the matter is some people can see it and some cannot at "retina" quality. Most experts agree that the real "retina" is somewhere from 400-450 PPI that would cover most of the above average" vision population.

Ultimately its a personal choice. If you personally cannot see a difference at a particular PPI at the distance you hold your phone, then it is good enough for you...

What gets me is the people that assume because they cant make out pixels on a particular phone or tablet, no-one else can. Other people can, buy what suits your needs.

RE: damn it!
By invidious on 5/14/2014 1:47:47 PM , Rating: 1
Pixel density can't overcome distortion; it is the other way around. Downscaling distortion blurs the image and undermines the benefits of having high pixel density.

The only way to overcome downscaling distortion is to crop the image. Apple can (and probably will) crop the video content that they distribute through itunes. And obviously apps will be developed for the native resolution. But any generic 1080p content that you come across online is going to be distorted and you are just going to have to live with it.

If you can't notice it then enjoy your blissful ignorance. But when you try to tell other people what they can't see all you are doing is confirming your own ignorance.

RE: damn it!
By Da W on 5/14/2014 3:12:52 PM , Rating: 1
So every iPhone thus far and most other phones have distorted images while playing 1080p content and over 1billion user are just ignorant?

You don't insert a Blue Ray in your phone you know? Most video people view on a phone is from Youtube or Netflix. They both offer different resolution format so they can ADJUST depending on the screen your viewing.


RE: damn it!
By ExarKun333 on 5/14/2014 4:30:56 PM , Rating: 2
You are right that over a 1 billion people are getting sub-optimal video. Is it good? Sure. Is it as good as a native 1080p display? Definitely not. I have a 6'' phone with a native 1080 display. It is MUCH better than watching the same video on my wife's 5S. No contest. Arguing against down-sampling is actually the real ignorance here. It is real and it affects quality. There is no debate there, but video processing does mitigate it somewhat, but not entirely.

RE: damn it!
By retrospooty on 5/15/2014 8:29:22 AM , Rating: 2
"Arguing against down-sampling is actually the real ignorance here."

While you are correct in your statement, that isn't what Da W is doing.

"The best way to do things is [insert whichever way Apple chose]."

THAT is what he is doing.

RE: damn it!
By Da W on 5/15/2014 8:53:19 AM , Rating: 2
Blah blah blah.
I got a 1080P android phone too you know?
And you know what? I don't watch video on it. I use it to take pictures. I use my 720P old windows phone for music and e-mail. And i watch HD movies on my TV !

Where do you people find the time to view movies on your phone? Don't you have a job? Wife? Kids?

RE: damn it!
By retrospooty on 5/15/2014 10:10:54 AM , Rating: 2
So... First it's about downscaling, now its just about time to watch?

Look, if it's not important to you, that is perfectly fine. Watching 1080p video on my phone is really not important to me either, but don't crap on it because others do or can. 1920x1080 is a standard. A huge standard because it is what so many videos are scaled to and so many high end phones, PC monitors and TV's are set at. It's a universal "standard" that once again, Apple has failed to measure up to, even on brand now not even released yet products.

RE: damn it!
By chripuck on 5/15/2014 12:57:39 PM , Rating: 2
He didn't change his point, it was an extension of his point. 1080p downscaled is a moot point for most people, because either they can't tell the difference or they don't use the feature enough to notice.

Quite honestly I don't think I've ever watched an HD clip for more than the typical YouTube clip on any phone I've ever owned, going all the way back to the original iPhone.

The people who bought Apple before will buy it again because for whatever reason, they. do. not. care. That is his one and only point.

RE: damn it!
By retrospooty on 5/15/2014 1:10:28 PM , Rating: 2
"The people who bought Apple before will buy it again because for whatever reason, they. do. not. care . That is his one and only point"

True that... If that was the point I apologize and I agree. I missed it entirely, but I agree.

RE: damn it!
By Reclaimer77 on 5/16/2014 9:02:50 AM , Rating: 1
Apple fans never seem to care about something, until Apple adopts it. Then it's the greatest thing ever.

In the end you just come off like a hypocrite. Blasting innovations and calling them "gimmicks" just because they weren't used first by 'the precious' is an idiotic position to take.

He didn't change his point, it was an extension of his point. 1080p downscaled is a moot point for most people, because either they can't tell the difference or they don't use the feature enough to notice.

Of course they don't notice if they have nothing to compare it to. But why do you think Apple is going larger? People think their iPhone screen looks good until someone next to them pulls out a big Android phone with a gorgeous 1080p display, then suddenly their iPhone doesn't seem so great.

This display coveting by iPhone users has been growing more and more vocal as time has progressed. Apple has definitely been losing sales due to their stubbornness to offer it's users a reasonable choice in phone sizes.

To say people 'don't care' just isn't credible.

RE: damn it!
By retrospooty on 5/16/2014 9:58:44 AM , Rating: 2
Exactly... Apple's own research proves what we already knew. The vast majority of people that left Apple for another platform did it to get a bigger higher res screen. Not because they weren't happy with the platform, the OS, or any other feature, or just wanted something different... It was almost all about screen. That and that alone is why Apple finally bowed and is making larger phones now.

RE: damn it!
By plonk420 on 5/17/2014 9:00:36 PM , Rating: 2
you WON'T be able to tell the difference if the scaler is decent (Spline36, for example).

RE: damn it!
By invidious on 5/19/2014 4:54:30 PM , Rating: 2
No one said that owning an iphone is an ignorant thing to do. What's ignorant is deriving one's view of correctness from brand loyalty and then preach that brand ideology as fact.

Youtube doesn't support the iphone's native display resolutions... Which was the whole point to begin with.


RE: damn it!
By TheDoc9 on 5/14/14, Rating: 0
RE: damn it!
By chripuck on 5/15/2014 12:58:51 PM , Rating: 2
And the artifacts will be worse than the current iPhone? It's an improvement, let the Apple people be happy and move on.

RE: damn it!
By michael2k on 5/14/2014 4:36:57 PM , Rating: 4
No, pixel density isn't meant to overcome distortion.

Distortion, however, isn't the right word you're looking for.

If you have two phones, one at 960p and one at 1080p, side by side, and they were otherwise identically sized, you wouldn't be able to see the difference.

Yes, there are going to be specific test cases (say a sloped single pixel white line on a black background) that the 1080p will render better than the 960p, but if we are talking video? Not for normal use case.

You make yourself feel better at being able to see pixels no one else can, if it helps.

RE: damn it!
By inighthawki on 5/14/2014 5:25:20 PM , Rating: 1
Video playback on non-native resolutions isn't about seeing pixels. The bilinear filtering used to stretch the image to a non-native surface size causes fuzziness to avoid pixel duplication. The content will be slightly fuzzy. Most people don't notice because it's hard to tell without a reference, but I guarantee if you watched them side by side, the native 1080p display would look more crisp.

RE: damn it!
By Guspaz on 5/14/2014 6:52:15 PM , Rating: 2
You're assuming that they are (or will be) be using bilinear filtering.

RE: damn it!
By inighthawki on 5/14/2014 10:25:02 PM , Rating: 2
You would be pretty insane not to. It's free on the hardware and, even in video playback, will look better than point filtering (pixel duplication)

RE: damn it!
By Guspaz on 5/15/2014 10:28:51 AM , Rating: 2
No, I meant that you assume that they're using bilinear filtering rather than an algorithm that better preserves detail when downsampling. When quality matters, bilinear is rarely used for downsampling. Catmull-Rom is much better, for example, although there are others that are even better. I'm not sure what the PowerVR chips implement in hardware (bilinear and maybe bicubic, perhaps) but such filters can also be done on the GPU if need be, or Apple could implement a filter in hardware since we're talking about a new device with a new SoC.

RE: damn it!
By Solandri on 5/15/2014 12:00:49 PM , Rating: 2
The better filters require more processing power, which would reduce video playback time on battery. That's the reason bilinear filtering is so popular - it's fairly simple and cheap (in terms of power) to do.

It's not an issue in plugged-in devices (TVs)or devices with a lot of other power draw (laptops). But I can see it being an issue with a device which is extremely battery-limited (phones). Assuming you watch a lot of content which needs to be rescaled of course.

RE: damn it!
By ssj3gohan on 5/16/2014 11:02:03 AM , Rating: 2
Pretty much everything last-generation uses exclusively bilinear filtering. Only very recently have video ISPs been announced that support (but not default!) bicubic. It's a totally different ballpark than, say, desktop GPUs and video codecs which have historically been incorporating anything they can get their hands on... well, except for Intel, who only started playing ball in the video quality game since a couple generations ago.

RE: damn it!
By chripuck on 5/15/2014 1:02:18 PM , Rating: 2
Or they could just make all video centered and auto-cropped... then you would get pixel perfect video with very little useful information lost.

We're talking about average users here. They're largely the same people who think full screen widescreen is the same as true 16x9 widescreen blu ray's.

RE: damn it!
By chripuck on 5/15/2014 1:03:24 PM , Rating: 2
BLECH... meant to write 21x9

RE: damn it!
By name99 on 5/14/2014 4:49:26 PM , Rating: 4
"Downscaling distortion"?
Yes, crappy downscaling like a simple bilinear filter sucks. But mathematically correct downscale filtering (a high tap filter) is totally unproblematic on video material.

You do realize the material you're watching has gone through substantially more aggressive "distortion" already, in the process of simply compressing it?
Those "distortions" that are especially relevant range from the chroma sub-sampling to the n-tap filters that are used to perform sub-pixel motion.

RE: damn it!
By Solandri on 5/15/2014 12:14:54 PM , Rating: 2
Chroma sub-sampling is used because contrary to the Retina and anti-Pentile hype, our eyes simply don't have as much color resolution as they do intensity (B&W) resolution. You can easily reduce the color info by 2-4x, and blue by 4-9x (i.e. half or 1/3rd resolution), and people simply won't notice unless they're viewing a magnified image.

All images shot with any digital camera (other than the professional 3-CCD video cameras) have the color resolution reduced at the source anyway (they use a Bayer filter). There's no point not using chroma sub-sampling because all you'd be doing is making up and storing color information which doesn't exist in the source.

That said, yes this stuff is totally unproblematic with organic images like most video. The rods and cones in your eyes produce a "distorted" image of the real world, and your brain already does the work of cleaning it up. So a slightly different distortion added by downsampling a video image isn't going to change things much. It only starts to look soft when you downsample things with sharp lines like computer desktop images. Those are deliberately designed to fall along pixel borders, and start to look bad when downsampled.

RE: damn it!
By danbob999 on 5/14/2014 2:05:43 PM , Rating: 2
At this point the only benefit of 1920x1080 is that it is a more standard resolution, therefore allows 1:1 mapping when you connect to an external TV.

RE: damn it!
By Solandri on 5/15/2014 12:19:51 PM , Rating: 2
Your 1080p TV does not show a 1:1 mapped 1080p image. It upsamples the image and overscans. i.e It enlarges the image to slightly bigger than 1920x1080 and cuts off the edges.

RE: damn it!
By bigboxes on 5/18/2014 12:09:28 AM , Rating: 2
I have set my TV's overscan setting to off.

RE: damn it!
By Nutzo on 5/14/2014 11:59:03 AM , Rating: 5
Why can't Apple include a 1280 screen instead of 960

Due to a poor design decision in the early iPhones, making the OS resolution dependent, Apple is stuck with multiple's of the original resolution. they can't change this withour breaking some of the backwards compatability with apps.

RE: damn it!
By inighthawki on 5/14/2014 12:08:10 PM , Rating: 2
Right, but 1280 would be one more multiple ("4x retina") of their original resolution ;)

RE: damn it!
By sleepeeg3 on 5/14/2014 12:24:04 PM , Rating: 1
No, 4x would be 2272 x 1280.

RE: damn it!
By Brandon Hill on 5/14/2014 12:26:53 PM , Rating: 2
Uh, that's what he said ;)

4x horizontally (holding the phone in portrait mode) is 1280.

RE: damn it!
By inighthawki on 5/14/2014 12:28:06 PM , Rating: 2
Which is what I assume he was referring to. The new 3x resolution is going to be 1704x 960 . 4x would then be 2272x 1280 . I don't believe he is referring to 1280x720.

RE: damn it!
By sleepeeg3 on 5/14/2014 12:27:16 PM , Rating: 2
Assumed you meant 1280 x 720. Sorry - early!

RE: damn it!
By inighthawki on 5/14/2014 12:29:29 PM , Rating: 2
No worries, simple mistake :)

RE: damn it!
By michael2k on 5/14/2014 1:09:55 PM , Rating: 1
What benefit is a 1080p screen over a 960p screen here?

As far as I can determine, no one in a sane use case should be able to see the difference. We are talking about well over 400ppi here, I have to hold my screen at 3" to see the pixels at only 326ppi on my iPhone 5.

The only reason to go to 1080p is bragging and advertising; the iPhone HD. People already complain that Apple does too much marketing, and here people are asking for Apple to do even more marketing without real advancement?

RE: damn it!
By Spuke on 5/14/2014 1:51:57 PM , Rating: 2
What benefit is a 1080p screen over a 960p screen here?
So you can watch 1080p content in 1080p?

RE: damn it!
By McGaiden on 5/14/14, Rating: -1
RE: damn it!
By Nortel on 5/14/2014 4:46:58 PM , Rating: 2
Actually MOST 1080p movies are in 2.35:1. Does this mean smartphones should be in this format instead of 16:9 so we aren't cursed with black bars in addition to these tiny sub 6 inch screens?

They could offer a choice to chop 60 pixels from the top and bottom of the frame to get you an unscalled 1080p movie playing on a 960p screen. Just saying.

RE: damn it!
By inighthawki on 5/14/2014 5:32:37 PM , Rating: 2
True, but most television is in 16:9 (Or at least broadcast as such). So I guess the real question is whether people are more likely to stream TV or movies :)

RE: damn it!
By invidious on 5/14/2014 1:59:40 PM , Rating: 2
Are you just going to keep remaking the same point until someone agrees with you?

These comments are like time capsule of 5 years ago when everyone was ignorantly preaching that there is no point in Blueray because DVD looks just as good.

I'm glad Apple is finally getting on the bigger screen bandwagon. From this speculation I like the size but the non standard native resolution is an odd choice and the price is far too high.

RE: damn it!
By Reclaimer77 on 5/14/2014 5:57:37 PM , Rating: 1
Welcome to Daily "Tech".

Where people spend their time questioning technology and lobby for things to stay just "good enough".

RE: damn it!
By vFunct on 5/14/2014 8:18:06 PM , Rating: 2

"Good enough" should be the goal.

More than "good enough" is an inefficient waste and means you suck at design and engineering.

Good engineers know what "over-designing" means.

RE: damn it!
By lightfoot on 5/14/2014 10:20:36 PM , Rating: 3
That's only true if you are selling a commodity product, but you can't sell a device as a premium device if it is only "good enough."

BMW, Porsche, and Mercedes don't market their products as "Good Enough."

Apple can't either.

RE: damn it!
By retrospooty on 5/15/2014 10:15:53 AM , Rating: 2
"Good enough" should be the goal."

Sounds good for Apple... I am glad you arent in control of any product engineering groups at any of the major OEM's or my 1080 screen on my phone probably wouldn't exist.

RE: damn it!
By invidious on 5/19/2014 4:06:31 PM , Rating: 2
Everything that you consider good enough today was once a distant dream of an innovator who didn't believe in "good enough".

RE: damn it!
By chripuck on 5/15/2014 1:31:30 PM , Rating: 5
I continue to lobby for an App Store that has the best selection of apps. As a mobile developer I can tell you first hand the difficulties of developing for Android vs iOS.

It's gotten easier now that most Android Manufacturers have adopted identical screen resolutions, but by and far iOS has been easier over it's entire life cycle because of these decisions which means developers have been able to spend more time developing and refining than generating two dozen variants of a single image asset.

It's a choice that Apple has made and quite a few people agree with. It's a choice that we're tired of hearing people like you rail on about specs when, in the end, they largely do not matter. I'm happy with my choice and you can be happy with your choice without either of us having to convert the other.

RE: damn it!
By Reclaimer77 on 5/15/14, Rating: 0
RE: damn it!
By retrospooty on 5/15/2014 6:36:52 PM , Rating: 2
LOL... But that does go right along with Apple's mentality on the issue.

MS and Google: We make hardware to work with everyone.
Apple: I make hardware to work with ME.

MS and Google: We make software to work with everyone.
Apple: I make software to work with ME.

RE: damn it!
By KoolAidMan1 on 5/15/2014 7:40:26 PM , Rating: 4
Taking care of developers does matter. Brutal commitment to backwards compatibility is why Windows is a leading platform for developers on the desktop and why iOS is the same in mobile. Apple's "inability to do resolution independence" isn't the reason for all this, it is to give developers a consistent and backwards compatible platform to work with.

Development is both cheaper and significantly more profitable on iOS compared to Android. A consistent platform with superior developer tools that runs native code matters. This is why the same applications are so much better on iOS and why many high end apps are either missing on other platforms or lag by years. Microsoft has also done a great job here. Unfortunately they lack marketshare to compete and keep getting denied apps/services by Google.

So yes, the "trials and tribulations" of developers matter, especially when user trade offs are minor or nonexistent. I can't think of anything less important than running 1080p native when it looks identical at non-native res at these pixel densities. People watch HD video at non-native on their desktops and laptops all the time at a measly ~100 PPI, and it totally doesn't matter. Nobody can tell at over 300PPI.

It's the usual jerking over spec sheets while ignoring real practical benefits and trade offs.

RE: damn it!
By Argon18 on 5/14/14, Rating: 0
RE: damn it!
By themaster08 on 5/15/2014 2:08:05 AM , Rating: 2
They could have gone with 1080p for the iPhone6, and for legacy apps, added a black border. Since the screen on iPhone6 is physically larger, legacy apps would still be the correct original size, even with the wasted border space.
Yes, but you see, this is Apple we're taking about here, who are too anal retentive to do anything like that.

RE: damn it!
By GotThumbs on 5/14/2014 11:59:30 AM , Rating: 1
Haven't you heard? Everything Apple does is amazing, because they say it is. :->

At the end of the day, everyone just buy what you want. Just as long you don't try to justify your choice to me or tell me I'm wrong for my choice.

~Best wishes on your choices.

RE: damn it!
By CharonPDX on 5/14/14, Rating: 0
RE: damn it!
By hpglow on 5/14/14, Rating: 0
RE: damn it!
By aurareturn on 5/14/2014 1:33:32 PM , Rating: 2
Who gives a damn? It's still retina. Why increase resolution with no benefits and increase battery drain?

RE: damn it!
By Flunk on 5/14/2014 2:46:43 PM , Rating: 2
Everyone's doing it so it must be good, right?

So, its designed for my grandparents?
By Rage187 on 5/14/2014 10:58:36 AM , Rating: 4
To them, bigger screen = bigger icons.

TO me, bigger icons = Jitterbug smartphone

By purerice on 5/14/2014 11:42:31 AM , Rating: 2
That actually would not be a bad idea. Introducing smartphones to 90 day olds and 90 year olds.

RE: So, its designed for my grandparents?
By retrospooty on 5/15/2014 10:18:47 AM , Rating: 2
LOL... Exactly. I have an iPad 4 with a gorgeous 2048x1536 screen here and it has 5x4 icons. Giant freegin icons. It really remonds me of a Jitterbug, or Windows XP on "vision impaired" video mode where the icons are the size of quarters.

RE: So, its designed for my grandparents?
By chripuck on 5/15/2014 1:35:58 PM , Rating: 2
So jailbreak and make it how you want... I've got 5 icons across with 70% sized, circle icons on my 5S and it looks just as good as an Apple design.

RE: So, its designed for my grandparents?
By retrospooty on 5/15/2014 2:41:30 PM , Rating: 2
It's not "mine" per say. It's a company iPad that I am using for a while... But thanks for the tip. If I ever get one that I can play with, I will do that... TBH though, unless one is accidentally ordered and winds up in my hands, I wont be getting one. Android tablets just do alot more for me with a lot less effort. IOS is just... So... Bad... And you know what? It's choppy and lags.

RE: So, its designed for my grandparents?
By Reclaimer77 on 5/15/2014 3:18:58 PM , Rating: 2
You know the best part about the iPad? Watching Safari crash because you have a few tabs open and the "premium" Apple product only comes with a measly gig of RAM.

RE: So, its designed for my grandparents?
By retrospooty on 5/15/2014 6:24:21 PM , Rating: 2
LOL... But that cant be true.

Because "It just works"
- But mine works, and does so much more.. How it it better?
Its just better
- How is it better?
It just is
- But how?
Apple just makes better products that work better.
- But that Is what I am asking, better how?
It just is for reasons I cant explain.
- Oh, you mean you know jack squat?
Mutters under their breath while walking away

By Reclaimer77 on 5/15/2014 8:08:38 PM , Rating: 2
And how f'ing stupid is it that they finally make an iPad with a decent amount of RAM, and put it in the MINI! NOT the flagship model???

By peterrushkin on 5/14/2014 11:10:04 AM , Rating: 5
I'm a 3GS user. Love my iphone and been waiting for a revolution to upgrade.

Saw the 5" phones and love my friends Note 3. Heck even a friend of mine who has a iphone 5 saw the 5S and went meh. Now he is eying a Samsung as well.

Come Sept, if Apple don't have something comparable. We'll both be jumping ship.

I doubt we'll be the only ones who feel like this.

RE: Whatever....
By hughlle on 5/14/2014 11:26:59 AM , Rating: 2
If only it were that easy for most. It seems a whole lot of people are stuck with one or the other having spent countless dollars in the app store. I like android, but if i wanted to switch, i've not bought lots, but enough apps for it just not to be worth a switch. I know some app developers will allow you to use the apple equivelent app, but often requiring emails etc. Not worth my time.

RE: Whatever....
By Xplorer4x4 on 5/14/2014 4:05:58 PM , Rating: 2
Did you convert some or most of your VHS library to DVD? DVD->Blu-Ray(or at least doing so slowly but surely)? Cassette->CD? So on and so forth? So how is that different from iOS->Android? Generally speaking apps are reasonably priced and only cost a few bucks. If you use the app that much, is it to much to ask to spend a few bucks on the app again to show some gratitude for the time and effort put in to your can't live with out app?

RE: Whatever....
By Solandri on 5/15/2014 12:33:02 PM , Rating: 2
Under the music/movie industry's argument that we were buying a license to the music or movie, I had no problem getting a pirated version of the song or movie if I already owned a copy on an older format. I would have preferred it if they offered me a discounted upgrade price to the newer format like the software industry does. But since they demanded I buy a second license for the exact same thing, I had no problem holding them to their word and simply re-using my old license.

Phone app makers need to start doing the same thing. Are they selling a license to their software (in which case if you buy the iOS version you've also paid for the Android version)? Or are they selling a copy of their software (in which case you'd have to buy separate iOS and Android versions, unless you manage to get a copy from a friend because licenses have limited redistribution rights, while copies fall under the first sale doctrine and he's free to give/sell you his copy).
If you use the app that much, is it to much to ask to spend a few bucks on the app again to show some gratitude for the time and effort put in to your can't live with out app?

If it's only a few bucks, is it too much to ask the author to just give you something you already paid for to use on your new phone? You know, to show some gratitude for buying the app in the first place rather than pirating it?

RE: Whatever....
By chripuck on 5/15/2014 1:34:32 PM , Rating: 2
The different is software requires extra work to make it work on separate platforms whereas copying a movie to a different medium is very little extra effort.

RE: Whatever....
By blzd on 5/15/2014 7:57:56 PM , Rating: 2
You're in luck because on Android, all your favorite apps are free or half the price.

This just in!!
By elleehswon on 5/14/2014 11:27:40 AM , Rating: 5
Yesterday's tech at tomorrow's price!!

RE: This just in!!
By kattanna on 5/14/2014 1:36:12 PM , Rating: 3
remember apples OLD motto

Think, Different!

RE: This just in!!
By marvdmartian on 5/14/2014 2:33:36 PM , Rating: 5
Hey, if they thought you needed it, they'd give it to you, right?? Simple logic then dictates that you never needed it, which is why they didn't bother giving it to you.....unless they give it to you in a future model, of course!

Oh, look! Magic dust and unicorns!!

RE: This just in!!
By bupkus on 5/15/2014 8:50:44 AM , Rating: 2
before my morning coffee :)

Get Over It
By mgilbert on 5/14/2014 12:58:45 PM , Rating: 2
People get way too caught up in specs. Once you get beyond about 300 PPI, it is impossible for even the most eagle eyed user to tell the difference without a powerful jeweler's loop. Battery life, reception, durability, reliability, and usability are all FAR more important than the PPI war. Quit obsessing and analyzing this stuff to death, and just use it.

RE: Get Over It
By shabby on 5/14/2014 8:37:47 PM , Rating: 2
Would you buy a ferrari with only 400hp?
Premium devices need premium specs, and this resolution isn't one of them, that's why people won't get over it.

RE: Get Over It
By msheredy on 5/16/2014 11:32:17 AM , Rating: 2
Would you buy a ferrari with only 400hp?

You're todays winner of the WORST analogy ever.

Oh and BTW Ferrari has made several models with less than 400 horses.

RE: Get Over It
By marsax2014 on 5/21/2014 10:41:45 AM , Rating: 2
HAHAHA....that made my day.

Seriously folks, it's a phone and not a life changing device. If you require a corporation to repackage essentially the same device every 8 months so you can spend even more money and time debating how a few extra pixels makes it a game-changer, then you need to rethink your life. I have a 4S and I will probably hold onto it until it dies because I text, talk and check my email on it. Done.

RE: Get Over It
By titanmiller on 5/15/2014 12:52:02 PM , Rating: 1
Not all. I have a Nexus 5 with something like 450ppi and I can easily see aliasing on curved lines at a normal viewing distance. Sure, I can't see the pixels when looking an image, but for high contrast situations it is easy to make out the non-uniform transition.

RE: Get Over It
By retrospooty on 5/16/2014 1:24:25 PM , Rating: 2
"People get way too caught up in specs. Once you get beyond about 300 PPI, it is impossible for even the most eagle eyed user to tell the difference without a powerful jeweler's loop."

That is absolutely incorrect. If you cant see the difference at 300ppi to a newer 5 inch 1080p screen at 430-450 PPI, then you have an issue with your close up vision. If you see the difference and just dont care, that is fine, but it is there and it can be seen by normal people with good eyes,

Something is fishy here...
By ianmills on 5/14/2014 1:33:41 PM , Rating: 2
When dpi gets that high, scaling issues shouldn't be an issue. 960p should scale the same as 1080p. I believe either this 'leak' is fake or there is another reason they chose a 960p screen

RE: Something is fishy here...
By Camikazi on 5/14/2014 2:49:02 PM , Rating: 3
The only iPhone with a commonly used resolution was the first one the rest have all had odd resolutions for no reason that I can figure other than to be different.

RE: Something is fishy here...
By retrospooty on 5/15/2014 8:25:50 AM , Rating: 2
"for no reason that I can figure other than to be different. - See more at"

It's because Apple hasn't figured out how to do scaling properly. WP and Android can both use any res because they scale right. Apple has only been able to use even scaling. The retina version of the iPhone and iPad doubled the v and h pixels of the non retina versions. This time it's exactly a 1.5x increase. This way they don't have to fix the scaling problem in IOS.

It's not about the marketshare
By Fleeb on 5/14/2014 11:29:33 AM , Rating: 5
You think Apple will make a smartphone with a bigger screen just because the market is asking for one?


4" screen is just right. Apple said so.

But then again, a 4.7" screen for an iPhone will be more right than the 4" screen.

Serious horse power? Really?
By Bateluer on 5/14/2014 12:36:09 PM , Rating: 5
> Apple’s iPhone 6 will need some serious horsepower to fuel the 1704x960 display

Oh come on. Its not even FHD. There's been half a dozen GPUs that can easily push 1080p resolutions, and likely higher.

Nobody will notice...
By enlil242 on 5/14/2014 11:46:19 AM , Rating: 2
I'm sure most people will not even notice. Especially with the new models most likely having an updated retina display. I mean, I'm not feeling left out having a 1280x768 display on my Lumia 925. I guess I'm not the tech nerd I use to be. :-/

416 dpi, and people will still complain
By tayb on 5/14/14, Rating: 0
By kmmatney on 5/14/2014 12:26:58 PM , Rating: 2
I have a 401 ppi phone at the moment. I can no way tell the difference between this and my old iPhone 4S with 326ppi. Once you get around the ppi of the iPad (264 ppi) you don't gain very much.

I have a new report
By Jim_Liquor on 5/15/2014 6:41:27 AM , Rating: 1
Report: Apple sucks. Go get a Lumia Icon, 1520, or 1020 .. or any one of the numerous decent Android phones.

"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki