Mr. Vieira
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
|
Holding my iPhone like a normal person (cradled in lower left or right corner), my thumb - average size hands? - easily reaches all areas, especially the lower 90% of the display. If I have to reach to the top, it's a slight, 1/4" "shift" to jump up there, and still swipe all the way across and reach everything I need to easily. I don't even think about it, it's so small and natural. I'm not having to change any positioning or "re-grip", etc.
That's all I care about. I'm not interested in a phone that, after four years, doesn't feel this way. Period, end of story (so much so that, should Apple decide to come out with some giant screen on the next go-around, I can honestly see myself buying a year-old 4s and staying with what I like...I'm sure iOS 6 will sing on the A5 too). I suspect thousands of other iPhone owners feel/think the same way, even if they don't realize it or have quite put it into words. Apple has a lot of time, users, etc. invested in a certain feel and approach. They're not going to chuck that (it's been the same for five cycles now, despite everyone carrying on about how they "need" a 4-4.5" iPhone) just to chase specs or placate the very people they don't seem to give a shit about anyway (spec-obsessed Internet complainers and/or analysts and pundit types who've not been right about much to begin with in four-plus years, regarding this device/platform). Seriously. Think about it. Do either of those groups seem to be the types Apple responds to in other areas? Why would the iPhone be an exception? To me, the writing is so blatantly on the wall it's not even worth discussing for another cycle or two (and maybe beyond). |
Custom User Title
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: At home
|
I think I hold my phone like chucker... some times. Most of it, my pinky gets under it so the phone fully rest on it and my three other fingers keep the balance on the back.
Like Paul said, it's a little bit harder to reach the opposite top corner... but nothing uncomfortable. For me it's the limit. I don't think I would want a bigger screen. Yes to bigger keyboard and movie awesomeness but no to UI friendly which is more important to me. I guess apps could be made with that in mind and rethink the UI to not use the problematic corner. Meh... |
Mr. Vieira
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
|
I'm sure. It'll be interesting to see what happens, no doubt. I just think it's interesting that Apple has stayed with this size all this time. They must be happy with it, despite all the others out there (and people saying they should do this and that).
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Within
|
WRT name scheme:
When the 3GS came around, succeeding the 3G and followed by the 4, I had a feeling that Apple would continue the XS model versionining into the future: X is a design/major upgrade, XS is an incremental update (of the internals). I could see there being a logic in Apple wanting to keep the phone 'similar' throughout everyone's two year contracts. I'm not sure why exactly, but it seems to fit. Personally, I enjoy the prospect of buying an iPhone 5, then being able to update my contract with an iPhone 6, having skipped the iPhone 5S in the middle which was just a small upgrade — as this is exactly what happened for me with 3G → 4. (Though, the juxtaposition of '5S' could be. . .bad. Maybe the XS versions will end after the 5!) |
Mr. Vieira
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
|
Quote:
Anyone buying an iPhone 4s (especially if they're coming from a 3G or 3Gs model, or, even better, no iPhone at all) is in for a real treat...a small, sleek stylish design that many of us have enjoyed for a year...but they're coming in on the one-year tweak, with all the improved guts! I kinda like that approach. Let others "guinea pig" an all-new design for an entire year, and then you come in on the follow-up model, which will be a nice, solid improvement and enhancement. |
|
@kk@pennytucker.social
Join Date: Jan 2005
|
I'm actually glad I'm getting back on the "S" cycle.
Like Paul said, let others "guinea" pig things for me. Granted, there most likely won't be anything major, but you never know. No more Twitter. It's Mastodon now. |
Stallion
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Milwaukee
|
Since people call me a spec whore, I'll let it be known the only spec I will care about is screen size in the next one. The A9 based dual-core chips are plenty fast for the next several years. Get me some flexibility with screen size, Apple!
...and calling/e-mailing/texting ex-girlfriends on the off-chance they'll invite you over for some "old time's sake" no-strings couch gymnastics... |
Stallion
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Milwaukee
|
I have a theory that the next iPhone won't have the home button.
The opposite swipe of the notification center will return the user to the home screen. So, from the bottom to the top. Almost like throwing a card away in WebOS. The "open apps" bar will open by a double flick from the bottom of the screen. Imagine two short notification center swipes, except from the bottom up. Ditching the home button not only allows for a bigger screen, but the product will be inherently more reliable due to fewer mechanical parts. The iPad "go home" gesture (pinch all fingers together) is too big for the iPhone. I almost think the two finger swipe left/right to go between apps is as well. ...and calling/e-mailing/texting ex-girlfriends on the off-chance they'll invite you over for some "old time's sake" no-strings couch gymnastics... |
skates=grafs
Join Date: May 2005
Location: New York
|
I keep reading about how introducing a new resolution that isn't an even multiple of the existing resolution would cause problems for developers. Can someone elaborate on why this is?
I've never developed any application, so I may be missing something obvious. How big of a problem does this present for developers to re-work their apps? Is the "fragmentation" spoken about due to end-users having to check to see if specific apps are good to go for their specific device resolution? That does sound very un-Apple. |
Stallion
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Milwaukee
|
Quote:
...and calling/e-mailing/texting ex-girlfriends on the off-chance they'll invite you over for some "old time's sake" no-strings couch gymnastics... |
|
Yarp
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Road Warrior
|
Kind of funny that the joke about cell phones was always that they were getting smaller and smaller now the joke is that they are getting larger and larger. I personally hope the iPhone stays smallish. I played with a Droid Razr the other day and it was just pointlessly big. I mean, I have very large hands and could 'reach' the screen easily enough but in no way does that justify having a device that large as a phone. The Galaxy Nexus is being lauded as basically "The phone to beat" on all counts, but given that it is even larger than the Razr(sort of, razr is wider), I really can't see how that thing would be at all fun to actually live with as a phone.
The Galaxy S2 is about as large as I think a phone should be, if the iPhone ends up having a 4" screen, then I hope that the overall phone body doesn't change too much. (though this would likely mean changing the aspect ratio? would that throw a wrench in existing apps interfaces?) Side note about phone sizes. Apple deserves some credit, I think, for making a phone that is comparably powerful to the latest crop of high-end superphones(Rezound, Nexus, Razr, while being substantially smaller than any of them. |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
Bizzump!
I have a question for you all. Do you think we're going to see a new iPhone "design"/enclosure this year? Or do you think the new iPhone is going to keep the iPhone 4/4S shape, and change the guts? Part of me actually sort of hopes they keep it the same. A really great ecosystem of accessories has been built around the iPhone 4's shape — things like the Glif, and Popa, and that Lego case...that's a wide pool of options I'd like to be able to draw from, if I were to buy an iPhone this fall, and it's a competitive advantage for Apple that Android and Windows Phone, with their multitude of different-but-essentially-similar shapes, can't match. But beyond accessories, I'm really not sure Apple needs to change the iPhone design. (I'm assuming, here, that a large-screen iPhone isn't in the cards for this year.) All the proposed "iPhone 5s" sucked. At best they were just change for the sake of change, like going to an iPod-style metal back. At worst they were awkward enough (that tapered back) to make the iPhone 4S a relief. The iPhone is still remarkably thin, even if it's beaten by other phones (who still have camera bulges and come in thicker versions with usable batteries, natch). In fact, I would be super impressed if Apple managed to keep the thinness and size the same while adding LTE and maintaining battery life. That alone would be a huge accomplishment. Doing so while making the iPhone thinner and tapered and moving the antennas back inside for some reason seems impossible, and kind of sucky anyways. I would be happy with an "iPhone 4G" with the current design. I think there's enough they can do with the next iPhone — LTE, A5X, 1GB RAM, maybe some NFC magic — without having to redesign it this year. (It's true that keeping the same design for three years is unheard of for a current — meaning "not iPod classic" — iProduct. But that's including side-steps in design, like iPhone -> iPhone 3G/3G S. The iPhone 3G design wasn't really a major improvement over the original iPhone. It was thicker and cheaper.) tl;dr I don't see them bothering with a "change for the sake of change" redesign, but I also don't see them being able to make a thinner iPhone with LTE, so why not just keep the same design if they can fit a decent battery life in there? That would be impressive already, realistically speaking. and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
Mr. Vieira
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
|
I've long expected a new design, but, like you, I like this iPhone 4/4s design a lot.
The only other "look" I'd like would be an iPad type of design...the front would pretty much stay as is, in white or black. But the back gets a rounded-edge aluminum case with black logo. I'd like to lose the glass on both sides. I do not want a larger screen. I mean it! After four-and-a-half years, I don't want to re-learn, stretch/reach, etc. It'll piss me off and change what I feel is one of their big plusses. But if the new iPhone (like the iPad, it'll probably just be called "iPhone") remains the same look/design as today, I'm fine with that. I wish they'd upgrade or change the glass in some way, as I'd live to ditch the case and just use one "naked". They feel so much smaller and nicer that way, but there's no way I'm going to take it out into the world. Cool thing is, since I've had a case on this (clear Belkin) all this time, there is literally not a single scratch/scuff anywhere...that should help with resale. Unlike my first-gen iPhone, I don't feel the need to hold into this one for "historical value". |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
The antenna-on-the-outside design has so many packaging benefits that the only reason I can see Apple abandoning it is if they want to make the iPhone dramatically thinner, to the point where the squared-off antenna edges would no longer work. And I'm sure we'll see some super thin iPod-touch-style phone eventually. (My hunch is that the simpler iPod/iPad-style enclosure is also cheaper to produce and assemble.) But not this year, when they're adding LTE. They're going to need all the battery they can get. Just staying in the same place, size-wise, would be an accomplishment. and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
|
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
Apparently the battery in the new iPad is beefier because it's, well, 70% larger — no breakthroughs in battery technology there. That would seem to cast doubt on Apple's ability to put LTE and decent battery life into a phone the size of the current iPhone. (Though admittedly with the new iPad, we don't know how power-hungry the LTE radios actually are; it's likely that the retina display increased its battery needs too, no?). I really hope Apple doesn't have to head back to something like the iPhone 3G/S. That would be just a huge step back in my opinion. But the problem with the current squared-off design is that if they made it much thicker it'd feel bulky. You really feel the full thickness of the phone, with the squared-off edges. I guess that'd be another benefit of a two-piece, iPad/iPod-style design...it'd be thinner around the edges, even if the overall phone got thicker. But then you'd lose out on the packaging benefits of the external antennas, and maybe have to make the phone even thicker overall. So Idunno. and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
|
‽
|
Quote:
Certainly, part of it is LTE (hence Apple offering a toggle for it). Maybe part of it is the GPU. But likely, much of it is actually the screen. It would. |
|
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
Quote:
Are Apple's "wireless web" tests using WiFi on both models? Or are they assuming you're going to be using LTE 100% of the time on your iPad? 50%? I have no idea. and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
|
monkey with a tiny cymbal
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Lost
|
The fact that battery time isn't dramatically better on WiFi alone surprised me, too. My guess is that the other parts in the iPad are *more* power hungry than LTE is. Thus, LTE is a drop in the ocean of battery life that the iPad has.
The iPhone, however, is driving less than 20% of the pixels, a much smaller backlight, and half the GPU cores. In such a device, LTE will likely have a much bigger impact. Especially with its much smaller battery. |
Mr. Vieira
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
|
The latest...next-gen iPhone rumored to arrive in fall 2012 with LTE and 3.5" screen.
Yay! I hope so (the 3.5" screen). I am hoping Apple doesn't get in that neverending "bigger is more gooder" thing, trying to compete with these Android-based Pop-Tarts all over the place. Four years of habit/muscle-memory is going to be a bitch to undo. If I want a big screen that requires two hands to fully operate comfortably, guess what? I'll get an iPad. |
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
|
And, because for every iPhone rumor there is an equal and opposite other iPhone rumor, iLounge is sure the new iPhone will have a 4" screen:
Quote:
Both of these rumors are "in response" to Reuters reporting that someone else was reporting that the new iPhone would have a 4.6" screen. So the rumors are all over the place, as usual Like I've said before, I either see Apple using a 3.5" screen at the current resolution or an expanded screen with more pixels; I don't see Apple just blowing up the current screen to 4" and calling it a day. And I kind of doubt we'll see a larger screen this year, at least: LTE has already been enough of a hog on other phones, and I don't think they'll want to introduce two new resolutions to iOS developers in one year. and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong |
|
Mr. Vieira
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
|
Ah, here we go...some good meat 'n' taters on the topic!
From Daring Fireball. Or, the linked article itself, minus Gruber's take/analysis. All along we've been thinking about an iPhone with a larger screen (4" or more...like the article above, I don't think 3.7" is worth the effort/redesign, so let's just say 4"). It never occurred to me that to reach that 4" diagonal measurement we didn't have to go up proportionally, both sides. What the guy did at the Verge article was leave the short side alone, and merely heighten the display enough to reach that 4" number, corner to corner (specifically, 3.99"...but as the article states, Apple's PR could surely be okay calling it 4"; at least until the dipshits and malcontents started filing lawsuits, but that's another thread). This, to me, is a perfect idea in that... a) Increases the height of the display just enough to be called 4" and provides for another row of icons. b) the iPhone keeps its horizontal width and there's no real additional "reaching" or travel required. And the traditional (five years counts as tradition, right?) easily reachable "four-across" layout is maintained c) As the Verge article points out (with good samples), watching video on a now 9:5 screen (vs. 3:2) makes a lot of sense...it's a lot closer to the 16:9 we're seeing these days. By my quick-and-dirty mockup below, you still maintain "reach everything easily with a single thumb swipe" goodness. Which I really like. I'd much rather the iPhone get a skootch taller/skinnier than to go "fat" and add another column of icons, which would really add to the heft/width and could be harder to reach. Not to mention it would suddenly, after five years, feel quite wide and bulky in your hand. As you can see in my mockup, the new row starts just where the menu bar is on the current iPhone. Hold your iPhone in your standard, preferred method and see how easy it is to reach up to the menu bar (and beyond) to that new imaginary row of icons. I can hold my iPhone in the usual, comfortable way I've held it for all these years and my thumb, without any strain or effort reaches easily to the area where the ear receiver/FaceTime camera resides...which is roughy where I new row of icons would sit. And because these icons are movable and able to be put anywhere the user wants, those with smaller hands/shorter fingers can always throw their four least-used apps up on the top row, right? d) as shown in the Verge article, many of Apple's in-house apps - particularly ones with large empty spaces meant for typing or for displaying webpages or maps would only benefit/look nicer with this extra room. Developers who wanted to tweak their apps to take advantage of these extra pixels could. But, as shown in the article, those who don't would simply see their apps run with a bit of black letterboxing at the top or sides, depending on the app's orientation. Best of all, this only adds about half an inch of vertical height to the existing iPhone size. Put a ruler next to your iPhone 4/4s and tell me if you think that is in any way "significant" or cumbersome. Still fits in any pocket you have! EDIT: Story is now on MacRumors. Doesn't mean anything real, of course. But it's neat to see the idea making the rounds. Last edited by psmith2.0 : 2012-04-10 at 16:35. |
‽
|
Er, no? How is this even a new idea?
I don't know how often we have to go through the simple fact that no matter which side of the equation you change, you end up with a completely new form factor, resolution, or both. In this case: both. The thumbs now have an even harder time reaching the upper parts of the screen, and all apps are completely screwed over. Quote:
Very Apple-esque experience, that. Maybe Gruber was just too stunned from the linguistic mistakes in that quote to actually address its contents. I just don't see Apple making such a bold "let's break all apps" move just for a few more pixels, especially after five generations. The 7.85-inch iPad thing is almost more plausible, even though that one, too, would take a dump on the developers' assumptions. |
|
Mr. Vieira
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tennessee
|
Hmmm. Well, I don't mind the thing staying right where it is (3.5" at 3:2). I've established that. And, chances are, it probably will. This is really the first time I've ever remotely been okay with the idea of a larger iPhone...and only because it did it in a way that I hadn't considered (I kept mocking up a proportional/all-sides increase...which does get into layout/usability changes).
I don't know. Eh, I wrote a bunch more, but it's kinda silly when it may not even happen... I simply would be okay with a slight vertical increase that doesn't change the feel or layout (how you hold, use the thing) in any real way. But if it's a huge burden/hassle to developers (and Apple), then I'd rather things just stay how they how. Right now it's nice and easy for all involved...two iOS screen sizes (two resolutions each, although everyone's aiming for the higher, Retina Display one, naturally). Last edited by psmith2.0 : 2012-04-10 at 17:50. |
Posting Rules | Navigation |
Page 2 of 10 Previous 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next Last |
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NFL Football 2011-2012 | Eugene | AppleOutsider | 3 | 2011-09-13 02:09 |
AutoCAD LT 2012 Now in Mac App Store | Brave Ulysses | Apple Products | 5 | 2011-08-16 15:12 |
Aapl, 2012 & I | cosus | Apple Products | 6 | 2009-11-04 18:31 |
CDMA iPhone before 2012? | macuser256 | Speculation and Rumors | 9 | 2008-02-14 11:15 |