"My view continues to be that the iPhone 5 has the absolute best display in the industry. We always strive to create the very best display for our customers."
"Some customers value large screen size, others value also other factors, such as resolution, colour quality, white balance, brightness, reflectivity, screen longevity, power consumption, portability, compatibility apps, many things," he continued.
"Our competitors have made some significant trade-offs in many of these areas in order to ship a larger display," Cook said. "We would not ship a larger-display iPhone while these trade-offs exist."
Yep fascinating, I have yet to hear how Apple have invented and implemented this new screen tech. It is almost if he was just making things up, of course no CEO would be so daft to do that.
Although it does seem the retina magic threshold of 300ppi has now been quietly dropped, almost if it was made up
Yep fascinating, I have yet to hear how Apple have invented and implemented this new screen tech. It is almost if he was just making things up, of course no CEO would be so daft to do that.
Did you not see the technical presentation (about 5 minutes worth) in their launch? It will be interesting to see if it works as well as is claimed.
Yep fascinating, I have yet to hear how Apple have invented and implemented this new screen tech. It is almost if he was just making things up, of course no CEO would be so daft to do that.
Although it does seem the retina magic threshold of 300ppi has now been quietly dropped, almost if it was made up
Yes 326 ppi (1334 x 740) for the iPhone 6 and 401 ppi (1920 x 1080) for the iPhone 6 Plus. Even some forum members notably Calico Pie have been staunch defenders of the lower resolution and even Kidspud said that "HD is just a marketing term" that Apple are now using
The worst thing about the iPhone 6 (and Plus) is the design, not how they look as that is subjective. They are almost criminally large – particularly in height. Compare the Note 4 with a 6+ 153.5mm to 158.1mm (the Note 4 is 0.8mm wider) with a bit of thought they could have brought this in below 150mm. The 6 is almost the same height as my Lg G2 despite having a much smaller display (OK it has a button). Apple seem to have done very little to reduce the footprint of these devices. They are nice and thin though – but would 1mm of thickness been so bad if you could increase the battery size by 30%?
The worst thing about the iPhone 6 (and Plus) is the design, not how they look as that is subjective. They are almost criminally large – particularly in height. Compare the Note 4 with a 6+ 153.5mm to 158.1mm (the Note 4 is 0.8mm wider) with a bit of thought they could have brought this in below 150mm. The 6 is almost the same height as my Lg G2 despite having a much smaller display (OK it has a button). Apple seem to have done very little to reduce the footprint of these devices. They are nice and thin though – but would 1mm of thickness been so bad if you could increase the battery size by 30%?
I assume the physical button has to be a certain size and as it is now the focus of their security I can't see that changing. The alternative is the dodgy samsung fingerprint solution (I wonder if that will change in the future).
Yes 326 ppi (1334 x 740) for the iPhone 6 and 401 ppi (1920 x 1080) for the iPhone 6 Plus. Even some forum members notably Calico Pie have been staunch defenders of the lower resolution and even Kidspud said that "HD is just a marketing term" that Apple are now using
Only because you have to twist what people say all the time.
What I said was this:
Now that screen resolutions have gotten to the point where most users are unable to distinguish individual pixels during typical use, then any further increases in resolution are subject to the the law of demising returns and will bring increasingly marginal benefit.
Is that something you would disagree with?
I'll give you this though - Apple using the term 'HD' is a bit cheeky given that 'HD' has an existing standard accepted definition.
Yes 326 ppi (1334 x 740) for the iPhone 6 and 401 ppi (1920 x 1080) for the iPhone 6 Plus. Even some forum members notably Calico Pie have been staunch defenders of the lower resolution and even Kidspud said that "HD is just a marketing term" that Apple are now using
Yeah all very perplexing indeed.
Clearly the Apple assertion that no one wants to buy larger phones proved incorrect, the 300ppi is all that is needed now clearly again incorrect and dismissed. Big screens come with too many trade offs "we will not produce one while they exist" now clearly a simple excuse for the refusal to produce one.
It does make you wonder how gullible some of their customers must be to actually believe anything they say. Of course even worse if you tried to defend this marketing only to be sold up the river later on.
As you say we now have the wierd "retina" marketing term followed by another 'marketing' term HD
I'll give you this though - Apple using the term 'HD' is a bit cheeky given that 'HD' has an existing standard accepted definition.
Oh someone said it was just marketing - perhaps you are right though
Yep fascinating, I have yet to hear how Apple have invented and implemented this new screen tech. It is almost if he was just making things up, of course no CEO would be so daft to do that.
Although it does seem the retina magic threshold of 300ppi has now been quietly dropped, almost if it was made up
No, it wasn't made up.
It really is true that at around 300-350ppi most people will no longer be able to distinguish individual pixels.
Every time this comes up I feel like Father Ted in the second half of this clip.
Do you accept that there does come a point (any point) at which the human eye ceases to be able to distinguish individual pixels, or do you think that bit is made up too?
Only because you have to twist what people say all the time.
What I said was this:
Now that screen resolutions have gotten to the point where most users are unable to distinguish individual pixels during typical use, then any further increases in resolution are subject to the the law of demising returns and will bring increasingly marginal benefit.
Is that something you would disagree with?
I'll give you this though - Apple using the term 'HD' is a bit cheeky given that 'HD' has an existing standard accepted definition.
So are you saying Apple shouldn't have bothered upping the resolution as there is little point? Oh well!
Well Kidspud will disagree with you about calling HD a standard as he has said its only a marketing term
No, it wasn't made up.
It really is true that at around 300-350ppi most people will no longer be able to distinguish individual pixels.
300 - 350 where has that come from!!!
I reckon it is somewhere between 200 and 5,000 ppi myself.
So why have Apple made a 400ppi screen you concede then I hope that is is unessecary and a total nonsense from Apple yes?
Edit: Thinking of it, if you are claiming it is up to 350ppi the iphone 4, 5 etc aren't not actually retina as claimed by Apple either. This just gets better
I've had a Nexus 4 and currently have a Nexus 5, and I can say that I definitely noticed a difference between the two in terms of resolution.
The Nexus 4 display measures 318ppi and the Nexus 5 445ppi. I disagree with the 300 - 350ppi figure being bandied about as some sort of "cut off point".
I think it's less about there being a scientific/quantitative boundary to being able to distinguish between screen resolutions and more about those insisting so as having substandard eyesight.
So are you saying Apple shouldn't have bothered upping the resolution as there is little point? Oh well!
Well Kidspud will disagree with you about calling HD a standard as he has said its only a marketing term
I haven't said nobody should bother upping the resolution.
I don't know what part of what I said you are having trouble with, or why you seem hellbent on twisting it into something other than it is.
Which is this:
Now that screen resolutions have gotten to the point where most users are unable to distinguish individual pixels during typical use, then any further increases in resolution are subject to the the law of demising returns and will bring increasingly marginal benefit.
If you disagree with it, and want to mock me for saying it, then it would be constructive if you could say which part you disagree with, and why.
If it turns out you don't disagree with it, then stop mocking me for saying something I haven't actually said.
I reckon it is somewhere between 200 and 5,000 ppi myself.
So why have Apple made a 400ppi screen you concede then I hope that is is unessecary and a total nonsense from Apple yes?
Edit: Thinking of it, if you are claiming it is up to 350ppi the iphone 4, 5 etc aren't not actually retina as claimed by Apple either. This just gets better
FFS Its not an exact science as it will vary from person to person.
But most people, but the time it gets to 300ppi or much above, then it will hold true.
It only gets better for you because you are completely unable to see anything except in the absolute literal, even when it should be obvious to anyone else what the point is.
Nor do I know why you are putting words in my mouth as well. I did not say it was unnecessary and a total nonsense.
I said this:
Now that screen resolutions have gotten to the point where most users are unable to distinguish individual pixels during typical use, then any further increases in resolution are subject to the the law of demising returns and will bring increasingly marginal benefit.
Which brings us back to the straight question you can never quite bring yourself to answer:
Do you agree with that or not?
And before you ask, yes, obviously that applies to the iPhone as much as any other phone.
I'm not aware of any suggestion the issue was 'crap passwords'. The option of proper 2-step authentication might have helped though.
Not if the two step process was "date of birth" and "mother's maiden name". Two pieces of information that is easy to find on any famous - or indeed most people. I never use my mother's real maiden name for those types of questions.
I haven't said nobody should bother upping the resolution.
I don't know what part of what I said you are having trouble with, or why you seem hellbent on twisting it into something other than it is.
Which is this:
Now that screen resolutions have gotten to the point where most users are unable to distinguish individual pixels during typical use, then any further increases in resolution are subject to the the law of demising returns and will bring increasingly marginal benefit.
If you disagree with it, and want to mock me for saying it, then it would be constructive if you could say which part you disagree with, and why.
If it turns out you don't disagree with it, then stop mocking me for saying something I haven't actually said.
So Apple increasing the resolution are subject to the law of demising returns and will bring increasingly marginal benefit. So the iPhone 6 Plus having 1920x1080 and 401 ppi must fall into this category.
FFS Its not an exact science as it will vary from person to person.
But most people, but the time it gets to 300ppi or much above, then it will hold true.
I said this:
Now that screen resolutions have gotten to the point where most users are unable to distinguish individual pixels during typical use, then any further increases in resolution are subject to the the law of demising returns and will bring increasingly marginal benefit.
Forget your diminishing returns nonsense any beyond a certain ...
You say now the point is 330 ppi - earlier it was 300 - 350 ppi - previously it has been the same a 300dpi prinitng - which is it do you even have a clue what you are talking about.
So did you agree that no iphones before this were retina being sub 350 ppi?
So lets get this straight once and for all shall we - your statement is nonsense above.
If users beyond a certain point in normal use cannot distinguis pixels as defined by 'retina' then this 400ppi is pointless. If you claim this 400ppi is of benefit (regardless of the level or how marginal you claim) than retina is nonsense yes?
Simple facts that are not interchangeable, can't have it both ways CP which is it?
Forget your diminishing returns nonsense any beyond a certain ...
Except its not nonsense.
You say now the point is 330 ppi - earlier it was 300 - 350 ppi - previously it has been the same a 300dpi prinitng - which is it do you even have a clue what you are talking about.
So did you agree that no iphones before this were retina being sub 350 ppi?
So lets get this straight once and for all shall we - your statement is nonsense above.
Stop being so pedantic. Everyone's eyesight is different. There is no specific ppi where it applies to everyone. But it does apply to most people somewhere in the region of 300ppi.
If users beyond a certain point in normal use cannot distinguis pixels as defined by 'retina' then this 400ppi is pointless. If you claim this 400ppi is of benefit (regardless of the level or how marginal you claim) than retina is nonsense yes?
Simple facts that are not interchangeable, can't have it both ways CP which is it?
You can misquote me on that as much as you like, but my claim s not that it is pointless, my claim is that the benefit is increasingly marginal.
So do you agree with this statement or not?
Now that screen resolutions have gotten to the point where most users are unable to distinguish individual pixels during typical use, then any further increases in resolution are subject to the the law of demising returns and will bring increasingly marginal benefit.
Bearing in mind that if you are disagreeing, then you are effectively saying that anyone will be able to distinguish an increase of 400 to 500 as much as they would be able to distinguish an increase of 200 to 300. I'd be surprised if any optician would agree with you.
So Apple increasing the resolution are subject to the law of demising returns and will bring increasingly marginal benefit. So the iPhone 6 Plus having 1920x1080 and 401 ppi must fall into this category.
That's right, yes. I don't know why yourself and others ever thought this pretty straightforward point depended on Apple.
I've had a Nexus 4 and currently have a Nexus 5, and I can say that I definitely noticed a difference between the two in terms of resolution.
The Nexus 4 display measures 318ppi and the Nexus 5 445ppi. I disagree with the 300 - 350ppi figure being bandied about as some sort of "cut off point".
I think it's less about there being a scientific/quantitative boundary to being able to distinguish between screen resolutions and more about those insisting so as having substandard eyesight.
I'v tried this as I have both the Nexus 4 and 5 and I don't think you can really tell any difference. I asked a few people in the office and no one could tell the difference including some with really excellent eyesight. For the test I displayed a really detailed 24 megapixel image with maximum brightness. They could't tell any difference in system rendered text either.
Any difference you think you may be seeing is more likely a contrast difference or the way the colours are being displayed.
I think it's a slight marketing gimmick for a phone of this size so you can say it has a 1080p hd screen and I guess it perhaps makes it easier to display the content as it's a 1:1 pixel translation.
I'v tried this as I have both the Nexus 4 and 5 and I don't think you can really tell any difference. I asked a few people in the office and no one could tell the difference including some with really excellent eyesight. For the test I displayed a really detailed 24 megapixel image with maximum brightness. They could't tell any difference in system rendered text either.
Any difference you think you may be seeing is more likely a contrast difference or the way the colours are being displayed.
I think it's a slight marketing gimmick for a phone of this size so you can say it has a 1080p hd screen and I guess it perhaps makes it easier to display the content as it's a 1:1 pixel translation.
Nexus 4 to nexus 5 I could see a clear difference personally. Nexus 5 to whatever is next I would guess I'd see less of a noticeable difference. Its all personal though.
I'd be happy to have a little wager with anyone on here that future iphones will have a higher PPI than the current models though. Calico/kidspud are you suggesting that apple won't go beyond the (apple nominated) 300ish PPI as there is absolutely no point in them doing this ???
I think it's a slight marketing gimmick for a phone of this size so you can say it has a 1080p hd screen and I guess it perhaps makes it easier to display the content as it's a 1:1 pixel translation.
Apple made the claim on Tuesday that the 6 and 6+ have redesigned screens which are brighter, thinner, more accurate colours and darker blacks - oh and wider viewing angles!
I await the reviewers verdicts on all these claims
Apple made the claim on Tuesday that the 6 and 6+ have redesigned screens which are brighter, thinner, more accurate colours and darker blacks - oh and wider viewing angles!
I await the reviewers verdicts on all these claims
I'll await seeing them in real life to make up my mind.
Comments
Yep fascinating, I have yet to hear how Apple have invented and implemented this new screen tech. It is almost if he was just making things up, of course no CEO would be so daft to do that.
Although it does seem the retina magic threshold of 300ppi has now been quietly dropped, almost if it was made up
Yes 326 ppi (1334 x 740) for the iPhone 6 and 401 ppi (1920 x 1080) for the iPhone 6 Plus. Even some forum members notably Calico Pie have been staunch defenders of the lower resolution and even Kidspud said that "HD is just a marketing term" that Apple are now using
I assume the physical button has to be a certain size and as it is now the focus of their security I can't see that changing. The alternative is the dodgy samsung fingerprint solution (I wonder if that will change in the future).
Sure, if you reduce it down to those specs and nothing else, they are indeed identical in every way.
Only because you have to twist what people say all the time.
What I said was this:
Now that screen resolutions have gotten to the point where most users are unable to distinguish individual pixels during typical use, then any further increases in resolution are subject to the the law of demising returns and will bring increasingly marginal benefit.
Is that something you would disagree with?
I'll give you this though - Apple using the term 'HD' is a bit cheeky given that 'HD' has an existing standard accepted definition.
Yeah all very perplexing indeed.
Clearly the Apple assertion that no one wants to buy larger phones proved incorrect, the 300ppi is all that is needed now clearly again incorrect and dismissed. Big screens come with too many trade offs "we will not produce one while they exist" now clearly a simple excuse for the refusal to produce one.
It does make you wonder how gullible some of their customers must be to actually believe anything they say. Of course even worse if you tried to defend this marketing only to be sold up the river later on.
As you say we now have the wierd "retina" marketing term followed by another 'marketing' term HD
Oh someone said it was just marketing - perhaps you are right though
No, it wasn't made up.
It really is true that at around 300-350ppi most people will no longer be able to distinguish individual pixels.
Every time this comes up I feel like Father Ted in the second half of this clip.
Do you accept that there does come a point (any point) at which the human eye ceases to be able to distinguish individual pixels, or do you think that bit is made up too?
So are you saying Apple shouldn't have bothered upping the resolution as there is little point? Oh well!
Well Kidspud will disagree with you about calling HD a standard as he has said its only a marketing term
I reckon it is somewhere between 200 and 5,000 ppi myself.
So why have Apple made a 400ppi screen you concede then I hope that is is unessecary and a total nonsense from Apple yes?
Edit: Thinking of it, if you are claiming it is up to 350ppi the iphone 4, 5 etc aren't not actually retina as claimed by Apple either. This just gets better
The Nexus 4 display measures 318ppi and the Nexus 5 445ppi. I disagree with the 300 - 350ppi figure being bandied about as some sort of "cut off point".
I think it's less about there being a scientific/quantitative boundary to being able to distinguish between screen resolutions and more about those insisting so as having substandard eyesight.
I haven't said nobody should bother upping the resolution.
I don't know what part of what I said you are having trouble with, or why you seem hellbent on twisting it into something other than it is.
Which is this:
Now that screen resolutions have gotten to the point where most users are unable to distinguish individual pixels during typical use, then any further increases in resolution are subject to the the law of demising returns and will bring increasingly marginal benefit.
If you disagree with it, and want to mock me for saying it, then it would be constructive if you could say which part you disagree with, and why.
If it turns out you don't disagree with it, then stop mocking me for saying something I haven't actually said.
FFS Its not an exact science as it will vary from person to person.
But most people, but the time it gets to 300ppi or much above, then it will hold true.
It only gets better for you because you are completely unable to see anything except in the absolute literal, even when it should be obvious to anyone else what the point is.
Nor do I know why you are putting words in my mouth as well. I did not say it was unnecessary and a total nonsense.
I said this:
Now that screen resolutions have gotten to the point where most users are unable to distinguish individual pixels during typical use, then any further increases in resolution are subject to the the law of demising returns and will bring increasingly marginal benefit.
Which brings us back to the straight question you can never quite bring yourself to answer:
Do you agree with that or not?
And before you ask, yes, obviously that applies to the iPhone as much as any other phone.
Not if the two step process was "date of birth" and "mother's maiden name". Two pieces of information that is easy to find on any famous - or indeed most people. I never use my mother's real maiden name for those types of questions.
So Apple increasing the resolution are subject to the law of demising returns and will bring increasingly marginal benefit. So the iPhone 6 Plus having 1920x1080 and 401 ppi must fall into this category.
Forget your diminishing returns nonsense any beyond a certain ...
You say now the point is 330 ppi - earlier it was 300 - 350 ppi - previously it has been the same a 300dpi prinitng - which is it do you even have a clue what you are talking about.
So did you agree that no iphones before this were retina being sub 350 ppi?
So lets get this straight once and for all shall we - your statement is nonsense above.
If users beyond a certain point in normal use cannot distinguis pixels as defined by 'retina' then this 400ppi is pointless. If you claim this 400ppi is of benefit (regardless of the level or how marginal you claim) than retina is nonsense yes?
Simple facts that are not interchangeable, can't have it both ways CP which is it?
Except its not nonsense.
Stop being so pedantic. Everyone's eyesight is different. There is no specific ppi where it applies to everyone. But it does apply to most people somewhere in the region of 300ppi.
You can misquote me on that as much as you like, but my claim s not that it is pointless, my claim is that the benefit is increasingly marginal.
So do you agree with this statement or not?
Now that screen resolutions have gotten to the point where most users are unable to distinguish individual pixels during typical use, then any further increases in resolution are subject to the the law of demising returns and will bring increasingly marginal benefit.
Bearing in mind that if you are disagreeing, then you are effectively saying that anyone will be able to distinguish an increase of 400 to 500 as much as they would be able to distinguish an increase of 200 to 300. I'd be surprised if any optician would agree with you.
That's right, yes. I don't know why yourself and others ever thought this pretty straightforward point depended on Apple.
I'v tried this as I have both the Nexus 4 and 5 and I don't think you can really tell any difference. I asked a few people in the office and no one could tell the difference including some with really excellent eyesight. For the test I displayed a really detailed 24 megapixel image with maximum brightness. They could't tell any difference in system rendered text either.
Any difference you think you may be seeing is more likely a contrast difference or the way the colours are being displayed.
I think it's a slight marketing gimmick for a phone of this size so you can say it has a 1080p hd screen and I guess it perhaps makes it easier to display the content as it's a 1:1 pixel translation.
Nexus 4 to nexus 5 I could see a clear difference personally. Nexus 5 to whatever is next I would guess I'd see less of a noticeable difference. Its all personal though.
I'd be happy to have a little wager with anyone on here that future iphones will have a higher PPI than the current models though. Calico/kidspud are you suggesting that apple won't go beyond the (apple nominated) 300ish PPI as there is absolutely no point in them doing this ???
I await the reviewers verdicts on all these claims
I'll await seeing them in real life to make up my mind.