How Apple can have a 4" retina display in their next iPhone

[jpeyton]

I much prefer overall real-estate to a small (nearly unnoticeable) increase in DPI. Even if the iPhone 4 came to Verizon, there's no way I would downgrade from a 4.3" screen to a 3.5" screen.

 

[Deeko]

they can keep the resolution and just bump the screen size up?

just like Android phones keep their 800x480 resolution of 854x480 in the case of Moto but with a variable screen size from 3.7, 4.0 to 4.3".

Yes Apple will sacrifice dpi, but it's not like it's any worse than an Android device's resolution. Furthermore, you should be aware that the demand of the 4.3" screen doesn't seem that big worldwide. Just like there's a demand for giant SUVs in the US, the rest of the world uses smaller cars. It's just the nature of things. This is why the HD2 was one of its kind at 4.3". The flagship phones are still the 3.7" Desire/Nexus One and the 4" Captivate. Shrug. The more you go around Asia, the more you see that it's all about the small gadgets.

Put an Evo/HD2 with its 800x480 4.3" screen and put it next to a HTC Incredible or Moto Droid. Sure, the size is nice, but there is a definitely noticeable drop in sharpness. Granted, the iPhone res is higher, and 4" is smaller than 4.3", so it would still be pretty good...but there is nothing wrong with trying to keep your DPI is high as possible. I think future Droid X type devices would be better off with a full 720p screen.

 

[Deeko]

No, no they weren't. I read tons and tons of reviews, previews, forum threads, discussions, so much information about the evo before I bought mine, and nobody dicussed it at all. Once phones started using 800x480, it became a nonissue because it was plenty enough for everyone and nobody thought twice about it, until Apple announced the 4 and touted its much higher dpi

Plenty enough? Hardly, it was just better than the competition at the time. When the most well known competitor has 480x360, then yea, your 800x480 screen is going to look fantastic. When your competitor's phone is now quite noticeably sharper than yours? You're probably going to improve yours.

I definitely noticed the drop in sharpness when I went from the Droid to the HD2, and definitely would have appreciated a sharper screen.

 

[qwertyaas]

I thought the iPhone 4 screen size was great... until I bought my Captivate. Now it really does feel too small in comparison. Even though it's sharper, I still prefer to browse on the Captivate as opposed to the iPhone 4.

Apple could easily put in a 4" screen. They probably didn't for simplicity and keeping the phone 'the same'. IMO, 4" is the sweet spot.

 

[McWatt]

This is just pure speculation, but this is my theory.

All smartphones from now until 2011 will be sporting a 4"+ screen. IMO I think the retina display is very nice, but its still only 3.5". Next to a 4.3" screen phone, the iPhone4 looks very cramped.

I think Apple made a mistake by not creating a 4"+ screen smartphone as they will be forced to create a larger screen phone which in turns means changing their resolution for the 3rd time if they want to keep their retina display.

Apple does not like fragmentation and this is relevant in the fact that they doubled the 3GS's resolution. I'm sure this helps the devs a great deal in transitioning their apps to iPhone4.

So how can Apple have

1. Larger screen
2. Keep retina display
3. Minimal Fragmentation

?

My theory is that if the iPhone5 has a larger screen, it'll be a 1024x768 4" retina display. If I did my math right at this resolution it'll have ~326dpi. On top of this its the same resolution as the iPad, meaning less fragmentation.

Do you guys/gals think they'll stick with 3.5", 4", or 4+ with some arbitrary resolution?

Huh? DPI is absolutely irrelevant. Only the number of pixels matter for avoiding the look of pixelation when dealing with a very small handheld device that can be moved closer or further form the head in order to adjust the angular size of each pixel.

Screen size does matter, though, for control purposes.

 

[TheStu]

Huh? DPI is absolutely irrelevant. Only the number of pixels matter for avoiding the look of pixelation when dealing with a very small handheld device that can be moved closer or further form the head in order to adjust the angular size of each pixel.

Screen size does matter, though, for control purposes.

The reason Apple calls it a Retina Display (marketing term) is because by their math, at about 12-18", the size of the pixels is smaller than the average human eye can resolve, there doesn't appear to be any pixels.

This can be easily summed up with DPI. At somewhere in the neighborhood of ~320 DPI, the human eye can no longer resolve individual pixels on something about 12-18" away.

 

[jpeyton]

This can be easily summed up with DPI. At somewhere in the neighborhood of ~320 DPI, the human eye can no longer resolve individual pixels on something about 12-18" away.

The main problem is that Apple's math is bunk and based on averages that conform to their best marketing interests.

It's like the age-old 720p vs. 1080p argument. Yes, there is an obvious difference in resolution. Can the average person see the difference? That depends on screen size, viewing distance, and visual acuity of the person. Will the average fat-fingered American prefer a larger touch screen or "invisible" pixels (which might be invisible to them anyway on a 800x480 display based on the variables mentioned above)?

The HTC Evo is a brick, but the Droid X and Captivate prove that a larger screen can still fit into a slim package.

 

[Deeko]

The main problem is that Apple's math is bunk and based on averages that conform to their best marketing interests.

It's like the age-old 720p vs. 1080p argument. Yes, there is an obvious difference in resolution. Can the average person see the difference? That depends on screen size, viewing distance, and visual acuity of the person. Will the average fat-fingered American prefer a larger touch screen or "invisible" pixels (which might be invisible to them anyway on a 800x480 display based on the variables mentioned above)?

What's wrong with having both? I don't see why people think it has to be one or the other...you already listed some higher resolutions in your post. Is it really that outlandish to put 720p on a 4-5" screen?

 

[jpeyton]

What's wrong with having both? I don't see why people think it has to be one or the other...you already listed some higher resolutions in your post. Is it really that outlandish to put 720p on a 4-5" screen?

There's nothing wrong with having both, I'm just talking about products currently on the market.

Look at American society. We've patented the motto "bigger is better". From 55" flatscreens to Hummer H2s, we like big things. If the iPhone 4 comes to Verizon, Apple should have a 4" or larger model ready on launch day.

 

[MrX8503]

The main problem is that Apple's math is bunk and based on averages that conform to their best marketing interests.

It's like the age-old 720p vs. 1080p argument. Yes, there is an obvious difference in resolution. Can the average person see the difference? That depends on screen size, viewing distance, and visual acuity of the person. Will the average fat-fingered American prefer a larger touch screen or "invisible" pixels (which might be invisible to them anyway on a 800x480 display based on the variables mentioned above)?

The HTC Evo is a brick, but the Droid X and Captivate prove that a larger screen can still fit into a slim package.

I think you're a bit misinformed.

Sharpness is dependent on viewing distance. A TV does not require such high resolution because well...you're 10 ft away. On a phone its a different story. A phone is about 10" away from your face.

What other material do you view 10" away from your face? Magazines, books, and print material. What resolution is print material? Oh its 300 dpi.

I don't believe Apple when they say that the pixels are invisible, but I do agree with them in that having a 300+ dpi screen is superior. I have an iPhone4 in front of me now and although the screen is smaller, its resolution of near-print-like resolution is amazing.

Mark my words when a 4" or 4.3" screen at 300dpi is released, everyone is gonna be drooling.

 

[jpeyton]

I think you're a bit misinformed.

Sharpness is dependent on viewing distance.

That depends on screen size, viewing distance, and visual acuity of the person.

No, I just think you're missing 2 of 3 criteria.

 

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

The main problem is that Apple's math is bunk and based on averages that conform to their best marketing interests.

It's like the age-old 720p vs. 1080p argument. Yes, there is an obvious difference in resolution. Can the average person see the difference? That depends on screen size, viewing distance, and visual acuity of the person. Will the average fat-fingered American prefer a larger touch screen or "invisible" pixels (which might be invisible to them anyway on a 800x480 display based on the variables mentioned above)?

The HTC Evo is a brick, but the Droid X and Captivate prove that a larger screen can still fit into a slim package.

Well I think there's no question that approaching 326dpi, it starts getting less noticeable. It's just like people arguing about 320kbps MP3 vs lossless. The argument goes on and on and on. When you try to listen for it you might be able to discern. I've seen blind tests where people do 192kbps VBR vs 320kbps and people botch it up. When given pointers, you can easily figure it out, but then you're spending your listening looking for differences rather than appreciating music. The same goes with a display.

Everyone loves to bag on Apple when they make a claim that's not 100% true. Yes it's marketing, but it's not like no other company would do it. It's not completely false, but at the same time you can see what they're getting at. Instead of showing why your Android device can have a better display, everyone chooses to slam Apple for their 326dpi claim. I'm not doubting that there are people who can pick out the pixels. But once again you realize that depends how you're using the phone. Are you looking at it like someone does when they inspect diamonds, or are you whipping it out of your pocket to reply to a text? Chances are if it's the latter, 400 dpi vs 326dpi won't really matter to you. If you're gonna pixel peep your ass off for photos, then sure. It's like the ancient 5D2 vs 7D debate. We all know how this goes. Microdetail will bite you only if you print 30x20 or if you're pixel peeping.

 

[MrX8503]

No, I just think you're missing 2 of 3 criteria.

Regardless, the average consumer can't tell the difference between a lot of things, so I don't understand your nitpick.

Some people can tell the difference between 300dpi and some can't, that is not my concern. What I do care about is that a 4" screen at 300dpi would be very nice. Like I said before, print is 300dpi, so why can't a screen that you hold the same distance away from your face be the same resolution?

Heck some people can't even tell the difference between 1080 and 720, but yet people buy 1080. Its a similar concept.

 

[yh125d]

Plenty enough? Hardly, it was just better than the competition at the time. When the most well known competitor has 480x360, then yea, your 800x480 screen is going to look fantastic. When your competitor's phone is now quite noticeably sharper than yours? You're probably going to improve yours.

I definitely noticed the drop in sharpness when I went from the Droid to the HD2, and definitely would have appreciated a sharper screen.

Both my 2 coworkers with an iphone 4, and 1 with an incredible say they would prefer my larger screen to their sharper ones

 

[Brian Stirling]

man, am I the only one who wants to see some high end phones.. but at the 3.5->3.7" range? I love my palm pre's form factor, and if HP ups it to a 3.7" screen or so, I'd be happy.

But after playing with the various samsung galaxies and the EVO... I really don't like the huge screen form factor trend (not for a phone anyway)

The new smart phones have larger screens because they NEED larger screens to make better use of them. You could take an iPhone and give it a 10MP screen and it will still be hard to surf the web and do many other things because you NEED a larger screen to do so effectively. If you want the smaller phone then you had better plan on being locked into limited functionality.

Apple may stay with the 3.5-3.7 inch form factor, Jobs has implied that, but if the percentage of smart phones with greater than 4 inch screens really begins to dominate in volume, and I think they will, then Apple will have to be a player in that space as well.

Two questions for you:

1. Do you have a laptop?

2. If so, is the screen less than 3.7 inches?

If you have a laptop with a screen larger than 3.7 inches ask yourself this question: why would a laptop NEED a screen larger than 3.7 inches?

What is boils down to is this ... either you want a petite and girlie little phone or you want a phone that can do many things and is larger -- which phone do you really want?


Brian

 

[zerocool84]

The new smart phones have larger screens because they NEED larger screens to make better use of them. You could take an iPhone and give it a 10MP screen and it will still be hard to surf the web and do many other things because you NEED a larger screen to do so effectively. If you want the smaller phone then you had better plan on being locked into limited functionality.

Apple may stay with the 3.5-3.7 inch form factor, Jobs has implied that, but if the percentage of smart phones with greater than 4 inch screens really begins to dominate in volume, and I think they will, then Apple will have to be a player in that space as well.

Two questions for you:

1. Do you have a laptop?

2. If so, is the screen less than 3.7 inches?

If you have a laptop with a screen larger than 3.7 inches ask yourself this question: why would a laptop NEED a screen larger than 3.7 inches?

What is boils down to is this ... either you want a petite and girlie little phone or you want a phone that can do many things and is larger -- which phone do you really want?


Brian

Exactly the same reason why people buy larger tv's or larger size monitors.

 

[TheStu]

The new smart phones have larger screens because they NEED larger screens to make better use of them. You could take an iPhone and give it a 10MP screen and it will still be hard to surf the web and do many other things because you NEED a larger screen to do so effectively. If you want the smaller phone then you had better plan on being locked into limited functionality.

Apple may stay with the 3.5-3.7 inch form factor, Jobs has implied that, but if the percentage of smart phones with greater than 4 inch screens really begins to dominate in volume, and I think they will, then Apple will have to be a player in that space as well.

Two questions for you:

1. Do you have a laptop?

2. If so, is the screen less than 3.7 inches?

If you have a laptop with a screen larger than 3.7 inches ask yourself this question: why would a laptop NEED a screen larger than 3.7 inches?

What is boils down to is this ... either you want a petite and girlie little phone or you want a phone that can do many things and is larger -- which phone do you really want?


Brian

Aren't you the one with the Palm Pre, the most 'petite and girlie little phone' of the smartphones?

If I ever get the chance to play with a Droid X or Evo or similar then I might be able to make a better judgement, but it isn't like I hate the iPhone's display, and I can browse on it just fine as can any number of people. As someone else pointed out, if Apple sees that 4" screens are taking the market, then they will act and release a 4" device. This is less a matter of Apple being wrong and others being right, or vice versa, and more a matter of Apple having made a decision and sticking with that decision so long as it is making them truly obscene amounts of money.

 

[Brian Stirling]

Aren't you the one with the Palm Pre, the most 'petite and girlie little phone' of the smartphones?

If I ever get the chance to play with a Droid X or Evo or similar then I might be able to make a better judgement, but it isn't like I hate the iPhone's display, and I can browse on it just fine as can any number of people. As someone else pointed out, if Apple sees that 4" screens are taking the market, then they will act and release a 4" device. This is less a matter of Apple being wrong and others being right, or vice versa, and more a matter of Apple having made a decision and sticking with that decision so long as it is making them truly obscene amounts of money.

NO, you have me confused with someone else -- I had a 3G iPhone but dumped it for the Evo. I would not trade the Evo for an iPhone even with the higher resolution of the iPhone 4. That isn't to say that I wouldn't want the higher resolution but I'm almost 54 years old and need glasses so trying to view a web page on a tiny screen, no matter it's resolution, just doesn't cut it for me.

The thing is, some folks are still locked into the old paradigm that dominated the cell phone industry for the first 20 years or so -- to make phones ever smaller, but that paradigm is a bad fit for the new smart phones and some folks just don't get it. They want 10 pounds of sh*t in a 1 gram bag -- AINT GONNA WORK!


Brian

 

[kaerflog]

I've have had all 3 size screens(iphone, HD2, Captivate) and to me the perfect size is 4" inch.
When I went to the HD2, I thought theres no way I can ever go smaller until I got the Captivate.
The 4" inch super amoled screen is perfect in every way.
Its also very thin and weight much less, 127g vs 157g.
The thing is Samsung can make the Galaxy even smaller.
Or they can easily fit a 4.3" screen on it.
I probably prefered the 4" inch s-amoled in a smaller size.
I still think the HD2 is a great size phone but I enjoyed the thinness and less weight of the Captivate.

 

[Headcase_Fargone]

I went from an iPhone 3G to the Evo a few months ago as well. I still have my iPhone but I can't stand to use it anymore. The screen is far too constricting after using the 4.3" on the Evo. I doubt I'll ever get anything smaller than this in the future either.

 

[randomlinh]

The new smart phones have larger screens because they NEED larger screens to make better use of them. You could take an iPhone and give it a 10MP screen and it will still be hard to surf the web and do many other things because you NEED a larger screen to do so effectively. If you want the smaller phone then you had better plan on being locked into limited functionality.

Apple may stay with the 3.5-3.7 inch form factor, Jobs has implied that, but if the percentage of smart phones with greater than 4 inch screens really begins to dominate in volume, and I think they will, then Apple will have to be a player in that space as well.

Two questions for you:

1. Do you have a laptop?

2. If so, is the screen less than 3.7 inches?

If you have a laptop with a screen larger than 3.7 inches ask yourself this question: why would a laptop NEED a screen larger than 3.7 inches?

What is boils down to is this ... either you want a petite and girlie little phone or you want a phone that can do many things and is larger -- which phone do you really want?


Brian

so, because I like the smaller form factor, i'm girlie? umm. right. apparently not wanting a brick in my pockets is a bad thing. Yes, I find the EVO and Droid X to be thin bricks. Very nice devices, but not what I want.

Functionality can also go so far. If the apps are built well, they'll work just fine. Web browsing is not a priority for me, so that obviously colors my preference to smaller screens.

Sadly, I know I'm in the small minority. Apparently very small minority on here.

also, why the hell are you comparing this to a laptop? because they can both browse the web? by that logic, you should have a 7-10" tablet because it does it much better than the EVO/Droid X can.

 

[TheStu]

so, because I like the smaller form factor, i'm girlie? umm. right. apparently not wanting a brick in my pockets is a bad thing. Yes, I find the EVO and Droid X to be thin bricks. Very nice devices, but not what I want.

Functionality can also go so far. If the apps are built well, they'll work just fine. Web browsing is not a priority for me, so that obviously colors my preference to smaller screens.

Sadly, I know I'm in the small minority. Apparently very small minority on here.

also, why the hell are you comparing this to a laptop? because they can both browse the web? by that logic, you should have a 7-10" tablet because it does it much better than the EVO/Droid X can.

He is just calling your phone girlie. You might be a manly man, you just have a girlie little phone.

 

[Deeko]

What is boils down to is this ... either you want a petite and girlie little phone or you want a phone that can do many things and is larger -- which phone do you really want?

A small phone is petite and girly, and a bigger phone can "do many things"? What an odd analysis. A small phone can be made to be just as powerful and do just as much as a larger phone - such as the iPhone 4, the Palm Pre (in its day anyway), the HTC Legend.

A small phone is typically not as good for web browsing or movie viewing, that ones obvious. However, do you understand that that is not everyone's priority? What about portability? What about battery life? Its no secret that massive screens guzzle battery, and how useful is that giant slab of glass when there's no power?

 

[Deeko]

Both my 2 coworkers with an iphone 4, and 1 with an incredible say they would prefer my larger screen to their sharper ones

You have to understand what I've been saying here - why not have both? Why does everyone in this thread have to turn it into a big vs sharp debate? This is about future phones. I agree that with the current group - I'd rather the size over the resolution, hence I have purchase a HD2 and an Epic in the last 6 months. However, I'm saying for a future phone...resolution DOES matter, as does size, so the best phone would have both.

 

[Brian Stirling]

so, because I like the smaller form factor, i'm girlie? umm. right. apparently not wanting a brick in my pockets is a bad thing. Yes, I find the EVO and Droid X to be thin bricks. Very nice devices, but not what I want.

Functionality can also go so far. If the apps are built well, they'll work just fine. Web browsing is not a priority for me, so that obviously colors my preference to smaller screens.

Sadly, I know I'm in the small minority. Apparently very small minority on here.

also, why the hell are you comparing this to a laptop? because they can both browse the web? by that logic, you should have a 7-10" tablet because it does it much better than the EVO/Droid X can.

You'll have to excuse my tendency to tweak people a bit ... no intention of calling your manhood into question...

The point I was making about a laptop is that it has a larger screen because having a larger screen has advantages that resolution alone will not. If you use a program like AutoCAD there's no substitute for having a larger screen though, once again, having greater resolution is always a plus.

When I buy a laptop I tend to go for a step or two down from the top of the line for uP. and HD but get the highest resolution screen they offer. A while back I picked up two new laptops -- an HP dv8t with 18.4 inch display and 1920 x 1080 resolution as well as an HP Mini 210HD netbook with 1366 x 768 resolution. Given a choice I'll spend the money on a bigger higher resolution display.

But, as evidenced by my netbook, I do see where there are different products to cover different needs. Interestingly, I think the Apple iPad is a little too large and would prefer a tablet in at about 8.5 inch screen with smaller bezel and higher resolution.

Getting back to phones ... yes, you could make a phone with all the power and features of an Evo but pared to a screen that's only 2 inches. There's no reason that could not be done beyond the question of why you would. There's not much about a phone with a 2 inch display that would interest me other than size so if size were of paramount importance than I'd have to give up most of the smart phone functionality in favor of a more girlie phone.

What distinguishes the smart phones, really, is the UI and that means the screen and the software/hardware that drive it. The larger the screen the easier it is to use and make use of it. For some, 3.5 inches is the perfect size and for other 3.5 inches is way too big -- if 3.5 is your magic number would you criticize those that say 3.5 is too big? The industry is moving to larger phones because they are better for: web surfing, video and image viewing, GPS navigation, spreadsheet viewing, etc, etc, etc. If the phone makers decide to limit the more advanced features to the larger phones, and I can see why they would, then either you start working out to beef up your biceps or opt for a smaller phone with fewer capabilities.


Brian