The 4-inch iPhone 5

“For Apple to produce an LTE iPhone, they would need to increase the physical footprint of the device, may be not significantly but an increase nonetheless. This is something I feel Apple simply won’t do, they hit the sweet spot with the physical size of the original iPhone and have not strayed far from those initial dimensions since,” modilwar writes for The Verge.

“Last week, while watching the Vergecast episode 24, came the Eureka moment. A caller named Colin (apologies if I got your name wrong) mentioned how he thought apple could increase the iPhone screen size without effecting the external form factor or pixel density,” modilwar writes. “Change the aspect ratio.”

“Colin’s idea was to keep the shorter side of the iPhones screen the same, i.e. 640 pixels at 1.94 inches. With that in mind how much would the longer side need to increase so the that diagonal measurement was 4 inches. The answer, derived using simple algebraic rearrangement of Pythagorus’s theorem, 1152 pixels and 3.49 inches. That leaves the the diagonal length measuring a little over 3.99 inches, I’m sure Apple PR could round this 4,” modilwar writes. “For those of you who are good with numbers I’m sure you’ve noted that 1152 x 640 has an aspect ratio of 9:5 and the 1152 pixels is and increase of 192 from 960 and that’s 20% more than on the iPhone 4 and 4S.”

modular writes, “But how will iOS cope with the change in dimension and increase in pixels? Well the answer is actually more simple than you might think.”

<Much more in the full article, including screenshots and mockups, here.

[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Andrew Wolniak” for the heads up.]


  1. I can do simple math, too, and 1152×640 is an aspect ratio of 1.8, which is even slightly more elongated than the HDTV aspect ration of 16:9. Apple is currently using established display resolution standards for all of its devices, and 1152×640 does not match any standard display resolution that I could find for aspect ratios of 5:4 (1.25), 4:3 (1.3), 3:2 (1.5), 16:10 (1.6), 5:3 (1.67), or 16:9 (1.78).

    In short, GIGO. The author’s simple math is matched by overly simple thinking. Apple would not do something so bizarre for so little advantage.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.