“The first part of the rumor [from German Mac rumor site, Macerkopf] suggests that Apple is internally testing not just dual-core iPhones like the iPhone 4S, but also quad-core handsets,” Oliver Haslam reports for Redmond Pie.
“We wouldn’t want to argue against that too much – it’s fairly obvious that Apple will be testing just about anything and everything at the moment, with quad-core iPhones being in test benches in Cupertino entirely likely,” Haslam reports. “That said, there is a big, big difference between Apple testing something right now, and them deciding it is ready for primetime. Technology may not be ready, or Apple may simply believe that the costs are not yet right if they want to hit a certain price point.”
Haslam reports, “It is the second part of this rumor which has us scratching our heads. According to the German site, Apple is also testing a variety of different screen resolutions for its iPhones, with the current Retina Display’s 960×640 apparently set to be superseded. Considering most of the competition is still struggling to compete with Apple’s Retina Display, we can’t see the next iPhone having anything other than that screen. As we mentioned earlier, though, it is almost a given that Apple is looking at all sorts of weird and wonderful things in the privacy of its own labs.”
Read more in the full article here.
I don’t think he knows Apple very well. Apple competes with Apple. They would put in a higher resolution screen regardless if theirs was already the highest. They’ve been known to kill off their top-selling device by introducing one even better, and when the competition just isn’t there.
Why not? If they’re going for a 4″ screen, they’re going to up the screen display resolution to maintain the Retina Display label.
The the immortal words of that moron fool John Kerry, Apple is both for and against quad core iPhones.
The more so about 720p thing, which looks nonsensical. Why would Apple want to fragment its ecosystem. If they will increase diagonal of the display at all, then, most probably, the width will not change and still be 640p.
When changing the physical size to 4″, you cannot simple scale up the size of the graphics, UI, etc of an App. For some apps that might work, but more likely it will make apps ugly, awkward, game controls in the wrong places, and other unforseeables. So if they are going to release a new screen size, they mightaswell up the resolution and encourage developers to design for a new size. Segment? Yes. Up to Apple whether it’s worth it.
But surely it is pointless claiming what the situation is now when this product is likely not coming to market for at least 8 months when the opposition will look rather different. One must also consider that it would be a year or more after that before it would be superseeded so the present screen might look pretty old hat well within that timescale.
TROUT vectors for increasing resolution on same-size screens suggest a “diminishing returns” beyond a certain point. But the same data run through a WINE analysis suggests, as in the case with audio, resolution is not black and white and that there may be benefits beyond what’s usually considered ‘good enough.’
It would be interesting to see a RICE comparison of current vs. higher resolution screens to look for that “special something” that goes beyond the specs.
Ever thought of using plain English so that people might actually have a frackin’ clue what you’re on about. Those stupid acronyms are meaningless. Unless you’re trying to make it look as though you’re some sort of expert in the field, in which case it’s still a big FAIL because again your TROUT, WINE, and RICE acronyms mean only a restaurant to me.
@Rorschach – it might be good for you to do a TWEAK analysis on squiggles’s post. An MFOA* chart of all of his posts reads unusually positive.
*MFOA: Meaningless Food-Oriented Acronym
Rorschach: I’m sorry. You’re right. I should have been clearer.
In audio, conventional wisdom says anything recorded above redbook standards, i.e. a normal CD (at 44.1 kHz and 16 bits), is superfluous, since human hearing maxes out under 44.1.
But real world tests don’t support that. Evaluating the same audio content at higher resolutions using a BUN blind analysis shows that people hear a difference. The difference becomes compounded as tracks stack up, so engineers generally prefer to record at higher resolutions.
It’s similar for visual resolution. Technically, a retina display maxes out the ability to perceive pixels. But any kind of PSTRY analysis of standard and super high resolution retina displays shows that people can tell the difference.
What’s interesting is to compare the results of high resolution audio vs. video on a LATTE chart which, with is a lot more helpful than a standard PIE chart.
He didn’t mention Gartner’s TOST analysis this time, and for some reason that always makes me think of Panini Tozt Cafe in NYC.
I once had a sperm cell named “squiggles”. His aimless meanderings made as much sense as yours.
I thought retina display had the greatest number of pixels needed. How does making the screen 720p improve resolution?
Actually the htc rezound beats the iphone 4 and now it have the best resolution display (720p in a 4.3″ display). I think it have 341ppi and the iphone 4/4s have 326 ppi.
“reportedly” mm hmm.
And what will quad cores do to battery life?
Some already complain battery life is too short; more cores will require more power and less battery life.