Rumor: Apple to launch two iPhone 6 models, including first iPhone phablet

Pretty much the same, but bigger; much bigger!

A new year, a new iPhone. At least that’s what we’ve been used to up until last year when Apple launched two new devices. Now, the latest batch of rumors suggest the company may be looking at a repeat performance with two iPhone 6 models being launched later this year.

These new rumors mention two iPhones that will sport different screen sizes, both of them being substantially larger than the current iPhone 5 models. This is also in-line with earlier rumors regarding Apple's upcoming handsets.

The first device that’s supposedly going to come out of Cupertino is a 4.7-inch iPhone 6. This handset is rumored to feature the same screen resolution that current devices support: 1136 x 640 pixels. This would fit in terms of continuing app support, but it would also point to a pixel density of only 277 ppi, making this the first non-retina iPhone in years if true.

This 4.7-inch version is reportedly aiming for a June launch, possibly at Apple’s WWDC.

The second iPhone rumored to be launched by Apple this year is a 5.7-inch device which would qualify as the first iOS phablet on the market. This phone’s resolution would be higher than the other version but it is, as of yet, undisclosed.

Apple has already broken with tradition last year when it launched two devices at the same time, so this year we may see an even larger shift. Besides the WWDC launch of the 4.7-inch model there will be a regular event in autumn where the phablet iPhone would be launched. The spacing between events would allow Apple to better target their devices so the new phones don't suffer the same fate as the iPhone 5C, which got buried under demand for the 5S.

Of course this is just an unconfirmed rumor and speculation at this point, so we’d urge you to be skeptical until more info comes to light. 

Source: Tencent via: Trusted Reviews | Image courtesy of Apple

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Nokia Lumia 929 shown off on video, again

Next Story

Details of 20 million credit cards stolen and sold in South Korea; arrests made

97 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Apple definately copies stuff and lag behind the competition because like others have said the 3.5 inch screen was considered perfect by jobs and refused to change it and mocked all the phones with having bigger and bigger screen sizes now there doing exactly the same and theyll call it following market trends... but just like my place of work, changes there own rules/philosophies whenever it suits them.

I think apple sits back waits for other companies to take chances on there products like screen sizes, more RAM, better screens etc then if it does take off and is successful like samsung, they try to block there products as much as possible whilst there getting there own prototypes and fully working version together to try to limit the market penetration of said phone and can try come in with an "updated" version of there own.

All the apple fanboys will disagree with this obviously but i think its true. Tbh i give up with the whole phone debate, i like WP but tbh when i had an iphone this WP or even if i got an android i mainly just use it for calls texts and browsing internet and e-mail, i cant be bothered with apps games and all that stuff. i dislike facebook, twitter or that social stuff so it doesnt really matter to me. I do like WP though i like the tiles on it... oh and the 64bit thing stuff is moving towards it but phones wont need 64bit power really for years to come but guess its kinda good to have it there and improve on it for when 64 bit is needed/if ever its needed

How long will it be?

If they do a proper screen, not try and give me some Apple junk, and something with a decent size, I will go back to Apple.

So does that mean we get to make fun of iPhone users for having such a huge screen on their phones? Like thy have been with us and the Samsung galaxy note.. Justice!!!!

Xerino said,
So does that mean we get to make fun of iPhone users for having such a huge screen on their phones? Like thy have been with us and the Samsung galaxy note.. Justice!!!!

Not really. Cue in the "Well, large screens have been around for a while, but Apple is the first one that got them RIGHT and delievered EXACTLY what the users expected" bullcr.

wotsit said,
Seriously don't want a huge iPhone - the trend for huge phones is just... dumb

Many many years ago, the LCD TV's that was 40 inches was OMGTOBIG!111one. Are the TV's that are 55 - 60 inches to big today to?

No they are not. The TV's gets smarter and can do much much more than just watching a movie. And it's the same with the Galaxy Note 3 (to take an example). It can do way more than a lil iPhone 5S can do and to be effective at what the Galaxy Note 3 can do, it have to have a big screen. Smartphones are not a bathtoy, they are a tool to help you everyday with whatever you needs help at. And so are the smart TV's today. They are not a toy where you can do one thing, also just watch movies. It's an entertainment system that can do alot of things over what an LCD TV could do 5-6 years ago.

Sorry, but just because a phone is smaller or runs an operating system you don't prefer doesn't mean it's a toy. Also, your comparisons don't make much sense since we're talking about a stationary device versus a mobile device. Sure, we like to see technology improve like TVs becoming smarter, but how did the Note 3 become smarter than its previous iterations? Or did I miss something here?

I don't even know why I'm replying honestly, as it smells just like a bit of butthurt since wotsit seems to disagree with you.

dead.cell said,
Sorry, but just because a phone is smaller or runs an operating system you don't prefer doesn't mean it's a toy. Also, your comparisons don't make much sense since we're talking about a stationary device versus a mobile device. Sure, we like to see technology improve like TVs becoming smarter, but how did the Note 3 become smarter than its previous iterations? Or did I miss something here?

I don't even know why I'm replying honestly, as it smells just like a bit of butthurt since wotsit seems to disagree with you.


It was a perfect example on why bigger phones makes it to a better tool in the same way as bigger TV's today makes you to have a better viewing experience when using the TV.

I'm not saying the Galaxy Note 3 is much smarter than the Galaxy Note 2. I'm saying it's a better tool over the Galaxy Note 2 as it have a better and bigger screen that makes everything better to use on the Galaxy Note 3.

Bigger is always better? Yeah I cannot wait to get a 27" LAPTOP. That will definitely be better!

I cannot stand large phones. I like the size of the iPhone 5S. I like iOS. It is not a toy in my eyes.

xWhiplash said,
Bigger is always better? Yeah I cannot wait to get a 27" LAPTOP. That will definitely be better!

I cannot stand large phones. I like the size of the iPhone 5S. I like iOS. It is not a toy in my eyes.


Ofc, if you don't use your phone for anything serious, then a Galaxy Note 3 will be to big for you. But if productivity, entertainment, web surfing, video watching, gaming and things like that are important to you, then you will love the Galaxy Note 3 in all aspects. PERIOD. I don't know about a single person who have gone from a Galaxy Note 3 to a phone with a 4 inch screen. Everyone i know personally and everyone i know about on the internet have never gone from a Galaxy Note 3 to a smaller phone. Alot says the Galaxy Note 3 are a bit big like my closest friend also said, but after he have been using the phone for 2-3 months now, he says that the things about it's size is gone as he got used to the size and understand that the phone have to have it's 5.7 inch screen to be effective at what it can do.

An iPhone can't do sh*t compared to a Galaxy Note 3 or even a Galaxy S4, so it's normal that peoples that use an iPhone thinks that the 4 inch screen is enough as it can't do anything serious like the Galaxy Note 3 can do. Now, let any iPhone users try out a Galaxy Note 3 for 2 weeks and let them tell you on how their experience with the phone was. They will 99.99% for sure say the phone is mega awesome and they will also say to you that the screen size is something that they got used to in a very short time and have forgotten about the screen size as the application that takes advantages over the big screen will do so good job at what they are made to do that the users simply are forgetting that the screen size is big.

Again, a smartphone is not a toy, it's a multitool witch are there to help you with your everyday tasks.

It's the same for an electrician. You can do do your job fine with just a screwdriver like this as long as you only comes over the type of screws the screwdriver can work on: http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/screwdriver-1.jpg (pretend this is iPhone 5S)

However, you will get into troubles if you comes over other types of screws. So to take care of that, you takes this with you on your job: http://cdn.overclock.net/3/3c/3c85f686_taskforce.jpeg (pretend this is Galaxy Note 3).

Here the Galaxy Note 3 takes much bigger place and are much heavier and makes you to carry the whole screwdriver set with you everywhere witch can be troublesome sometimes. However, to be effective at your job, you have to carry the set with you all the time.

And it's the same with the Galaxy Note 3, it's a multitool witch requires you to carry around a big phone that can weight a little. But you are for sure getting your everyday tasks on the phone done very good and effective.

iPhone can't do ****? Then how do I have dozens of games, several TV shows/movies, music, podcasts, and dozens of tabs on my iPhone? What can't the iPhone do? I use it to browse the web and yes watching videos too.

There is something that the Galaxy (or any Android device) CANNOT do. Access my entire iCloud data and sync across all my devices. I have Apple computers, laptops, and iPads. If I open Safari on my iPhone, I can see all my tabs from my other devices. I can sync photos, contacts, mail, and more. More importantly, I have access to my iTunes content on ALL of these devices. I have several thousands of dollars invested in my iTunes library. I can access ALL OF THIS out of the box.

My point is, you get the damn phone that fits you best. Not because of screen size. I do not care if the phone is smaller (and I used the iPhone 4 which was smaller vertically). I am still able to use all of these features on this size phone. I know a lot of other people that do the same thing. My dad for example uses his iPod for everything you mentioned. He uses Safari, many apps, watches Netflix and iTunes content, and more.

xWhiplash said,
iPhone can't do ****? Then how do I have dozens of games, several TV shows/movies, music, podcasts, and dozens of tabs on my iPhone? What can't the iPhone do? I use it to browse the web and yes watching videos too.

There is something that the Galaxy (or any Android device) CANNOT do. Access my entire iCloud data and sync across all my devices. I have Apple computers, laptops, and iPads. If I open Safari on my iPhone, I can see all my tabs from my other devices. I can sync photos, contacts, mail, and more. More importantly, I have access to my iTunes content on ALL of these devices. I have several thousands of dollars invested in my iTunes library. I can access ALL OF THIS out of the box.

My point is, you get the damn phone that fits you best. Not because of screen size. I do not care if the phone is smaller (and I used the iPhone 4 which was smaller vertically). I am still able to use all of these features on this size phone. I know a lot of other people that do the same thing. My dad for example uses his iPod for everything you mentioned. He uses Safari, many apps, watches Netflix and iTunes content, and more.


So just because you have games and watches movies on your iPhone, it makes it as good at doing that as a Galaxy Note 3 can do those things?

Ofc games and watching movies will work fine for you on the iPhone, because that's your choice on what phone to get. But claiming the iPhone can do that as good as the Galaxy Note 3 is taken as trolling. Sure, anyone who have never used anything other than a small iPhone will claim it's doing very good at those different things. But that statement from them will only stay until they have tried a Galaxy S4 or a Galaxy Note 3 for more than just 5 mins. When they have tried those Samsung phones for like 2 weeks, i can pretty much say that those peoples who swear to iPhones will be sold to Samsung after they have tried those phone for 2 weeks.

Sure, you get the phone that fits you best, but like i have said earlier, if you want to use the phone much more effective for serious productive, entertainment, gaming, web surfing and GPS stuffs and so on, then you can't live with a small 4 inch screen. Sending SMS, checking e-mail, checking Facebook and Instagram or Snapchat isn't considered serious works in any possible ways. It's considered as normal usage that every cheap Android phones can do as effectively as an expensive iPhone 5S can do.

Try to make some office documents on an iPhone to see how easy that is lol. It will be a pain in the ass. On my Galaxy S4, it's much easier to do because the screen is big enough to be able to use the application more effectively.

I can also add that i was using a smartphone from 2008 that had a 3 inch screen. It was a pain to use. However, when i went to the Sony Ericsson XPERIA X10i in 2009, it was INSANE on how much easier and better it was to use a 4 inch screen over a 3 inch screen. And i can pretty much say it right out that the experience and the ease of use will be the same from going from 4 inch to 5 inch screen size. The 1 inch change doesn't sounds much, but it's pretty damn insane on how much differences it makes.

Everything on the Galaxy S4 gets 50 times easier to handle in the OS than it is to handle things on iPhone 5S. This is a fact and those who doesn't agree with that haven't tried a phone like the Galaxy Note 3 witch will simply blow you away on what it can do and how effective it is.

Tidosho said,
Yet again, Apple playing catch-up with their arch-enemy rival Samsung and their longstanding Note phablet....

The fact is that what,really matters is not who came first with a new concept but who execute it in a way that makes it a commercial success. I bought a Toshiba 3505, the first Convertible Tablet PC, and I loved the,concept, the general public, regrettably I would add, did not.

Will be interesting to see how they manage a larger screen phone and not break their locked aspect ratios.

Will it be a 4:3 phone matching an older iPad resolution.
-or-
Will it be a 16:10 phone with even lower ppi.
-or-
Will it be a 16:10/16:9 phone with a new resolution that Apps will need to be updated to display properly.


I sure hope it isn't a 16:10/16:9 Phablet, as just this week I was hearing how 4:3 is superior for anything bigger than a Phone. (Even if the rest of the computing industry abandoned 4:3 nearly 15 years ago and HD standard dismissed the 4:3 aspect nearly 10 years before that.)

They seem to be running out of innovation.. Make it a little bigger? I can't believe that's all they could come up with this time around.

JoseyWales said,
They seem to be running out of innovation.. Make it a little bigger? I can't believe that's all they could come up with this time around.

The misuse of the word "innovation" is getting rather cliche.

I really want to know this. What do people expect new phones to be? Transformers that transform and fly around? Phones that you can bend to any shape imaginable? Cook you dinner?

xWhiplash said,
I really want to know this. What do people expect new phones to be? Transformers that transform and fly around? Phones that you can bend to any shape imaginable? Cook you dinner?

If the new phone is from Apple, then yes that's what they expect. Sadly.

i love IOS but its EXTREME biggest shortfall (and strength to some) is screen size. I would move to using only IOS if they do come out with a 5.7" screen version. As of now, I switch between both platforms.

VHMP01 said,
" The iPhone (full of )Air"
Nope, just another iPhone that will trump Windows Phone for yet another year or five.

Oh indeed, just surprised me that my phone which is two years older than the iPhone 5s has 10ppi less.

iPhone 5s - 4" Screen - 1136x640 (326 ppi)
Galaxy Nexus - 4.65" Screen - 1280x720 (316 ppi)

Your eyes probably won't be able to distinguish between anything higher than 300ppi, so any size screen with 300ppi or more will look equally clear. The only difference will be how tiny the text looks on the screen.

InsaneNutter said,
Oh indeed, just surprised me that my phone which is two years older than the iPhone 5s has 10ppi less.

iPhone 5s - 4" Screen - 1136x640 (326 ppi)
Galaxy Nexus - 4.65" Screen - 1280x720 (316 ppi)


LOL, not only that, but the Sony Ericsson XPERIA X1 from 2008 has a 311 PPI screen. It had 480x800 resolution on a small 3 inch screen.

Sony Ericsson had a retina display many years before the iPhones got it. So it took Apple like 2-3 years after Sony Ericsson made XPERIA X1 to come up with a retina display. And how many years is it going to take Apple to get to a 720p or even 1080p screen?

Another 2-3 years?

Exynos said,

LOL, not only that, but the Sony Ericsson XPERIA X1 from 2008 has a 311 PPI screen. It had 480x800 resolution on a small 3 inch screen.

Sony Ericsson had a retina display many years before the iPhones got it. So it took Apple like 2-3 years after Sony Ericsson made XPERIA X1 to come up with a retina display. And how many years is it going to take Apple to get to a 720p or even 1080p screen?

Another 2-3 years?

Why does it matter who gets it first? Is a resolution useful on a small screen? No...
As resolution goes up, what you see on the screen gets smaller. What good would tiny text on a tiny screen be for anybody?

Exynos said,
how many years is it going to take Apple to get to a 720p or even 1080p screen?

Another 2-3 years?


You planning on buying an iPhone?

Astra.Xtreme said,
Your eyes probably won't be able to distinguish between anything higher than 300ppi, so any size screen with 300ppi or more will look equally clear. The only difference will be how tiny the text looks on the screen.

I completely agree that most people cannot discern pixels past 300ppi.

However, Apple should not have started the 'higher resolution' race, and they should no longer use misleading/meaningless terms like 'Retina Display'.

Apple and Apple fans dismissed higher resolution displays on notebooks in 2002-2005 when the higher end PC notebooks started shipping with 1600x1200 and 1920x1200.

Move forward to the iPad, and it was a lower resolution device compared to TabletPCs - again with Apple fans dismissing the higher resolution tablets.

You can't have it both ways. Apple either rocks for higher resolution displays or they suck when they don't have higher resolution displays.

Even agreeing with you that >300ppi is more marketing that useable, why is Apple still trying to mislead users that their phones have a higher resolution or better quality screens?

The contrast, outdoor readability, viewing angle, masking (screen door effect), and color range of the iPhone 'Retina Display' falls significantly behind other phones.

Mobius Enigma said,

Even agreeing with you that >300ppi is more marketing that useable, why is Apple still trying to mislead users that their phones have a higher resolution or better quality screens?

The contrast, outdoor readability, viewing angle, masking (screen door effect), and color range of the iPhone 'Retina Display' falls significantly behind other phones.

What info are you basing that off of? There are a lot of reviews out there that say exactly the opposite of that. There are a lot of huge advantages of IPS displays over AMOLED, which is why Apple chose to use them. The iPhone 5 screen tested much better than the GS3 and the 5S tested better than the S4. I especially don't understand your claim about viewing angle. A major advantage of an IPS screen is an almost perfect 180 degree viewing angle, without color shifts. The same can't be said with AMOLED. Overall, the only disadvantages the iPhone has are the smaller screen, and blacks aren't perfect (but it is damn close). IPS gives you better real-world battery life, so I'd take that trade-off any day.

CSheep said,

You planning on buying an iPhone?

No, i will never buy an iPhone or support Apple in any possible ways because of how stupidly locked down iOS is on it and because Apple is slowing down the competition on the market because of their stupid patents.

I was just asking how many years it's going to take Apple to be able to follow up on the competition?

Having a fast CPU or GPU isn't going to make a phone good in any possible ways just because of that.

Astra.Xtreme said,

Why does it matter who gets it first? Is a resolution useful on a small screen? No...
As resolution goes up, what you see on the screen gets smaller. What good would tiny text on a tiny screen be for anybody?


You didn't see how much Apple hyped up their omgawesome 300+ PPI screen for the iPhone 4 in their keynote and how much Apple was boasting about how awesome their screens was because of it?

That's the point on why Apple was late to the party of boasting about having a good screen. Apple thinks they was first on releasing a retina type screen to the marked while they was not.

Exynos said,

You didn't see how much Apple hyped up their omgawesome 300+ PPI screen for the iPhone 4 in their keynote and how much Apple was boasting about how awesome their screens was because of it?

That's the point on why Apple was late to the party of boasting about having a good screen. Apple thinks they was first on releasing a retina type screen to the marked while they was not.

Umm... no they never said they were first.
There's a little concept called.... wait for it.... marketing

Honestly, people like you that have so much hatred for Apple, seem to "invent" ideas that aren't true. That's great that you hate Apple, but at least get your facts straight.

Astra.Xtreme said,

What info are you basing that off of? There are a lot of reviews out there that say exactly the opposite of that. There are a lot of huge advantages of IPS displays over AMOLED, which is why Apple chose to use them. The iPhone 5 screen tested much better than the GS3 and the 5S tested better than the S4. I especially don't understand your claim about viewing angle. A major advantage of an IPS screen is an almost perfect 180 degree viewing angle, without color shifts. The same can't be said with AMOLED. Overall, the only disadvantages the iPhone has are the smaller screen, and blacks aren't perfect (but it is damn close). IPS gives you better real-world battery life, so I'd take that trade-off any day.

When they came out with the IPS displays, they were ahead of most other technologies, but that was several years ago now.

Even your reference to AMOLED is dated, as Super AMOLED has been used in most phones for the past 3 years with most having a true 180 degree viewing angle and NO between pixel masking, like LCD even 'Super/IPS LCD' displays have.

Super AMOLED also has true blacks, better contrast and uses less power in comparison to virtually any LCD technology.

I'm not saying the iPhone display sucks, it just isn't the top technology used. It was back in 2010/2011, not in 2013/2014.

Mobius Enigma said,

When they came out with the IPS displays, they were ahead of most other technologies, but that was several years ago now.

Even your reference to AMOLED is dated, as Super AMOLED has been used in most phones for the past 3 years with most having a true 180 degree viewing angle and NO between pixel masking, like LCD even 'Super/IPS LCD' displays have.

Super AMOLED also has true blacks, better contrast and uses less power in comparison to virtually any LCD technology.

I'm not saying the iPhone display sucks, it just isn't the top technology used. It was back in 2010/2011, not in 2013/2014.

You said that IPS has bad viewing angles, which is absolutely false. All I was doing was correcting you on it. The GS3 has a super AMOLED display, and it had all sorts of issues with viewing angles. Or maybe that was attributed to it's crappy pentile arrangement. The GS4 obviously corrected those issues.

And AMOLED displays are only power efficient when the screen is black. And we all know that in real usage, that is not the case. That concept doesn't effect IPS displays, which is why they are more power efficient than AMOLED in "real-time" usage. There are plenty of studies out there that have proven it.

Astra.Xtreme said,

Umm... no they never said they were first.
There's a little concept called.... wait for it.... marketing

Honestly, people like you that have so much hatred for Apple, seem to "invent" ideas that aren't true. That's great that you hate Apple, but at least get your facts straight.

Do you realize who you're arguing with? It's Neowin's #1 troll! He's never right about things and always lies about Apple and what they "said"...

Astra.Xtreme said,

Umm... no they never said they were first.
There's a little concept called.... wait for it.... marketing

Honestly, people like you that have so much hatred for Apple, seem to "invent" ideas that aren't true. That's great that you hate Apple, but at least get your facts straight.


There was a HUUUUUUUUGE amount of talking from Apple about how good it was to have a screen with over 300 PPI as the eye can't see the pixels with that much PPI. They was also talking about how the PPI was more important than the screen size witch is funny as hell, because a Galaxy S4 with a 5 inch screen and 1080p resolution makes the iPhone 5S screen to looks like pile of trash.

Apple thinks the PPI is everything while it's just 1/4th out of what's important to see things good on a screen.

stevan said,

Do you realize who you're arguing with? It's Neowin's #1 troll! He's never right about things and always lies about Apple and what they "said"...


And this comes from the guy that even trolls that Angry Birds Star Wars II game are for free on iOS even after i linked you directly to the iTunes store where the game cost 3 dollar. And you still claims it's free.

So, i think you better not talk about who are trolls or not, because you are pretty damn good at trolling here.

Exynos said,

There was a HUUUUUUUUGE amount of talking from Apple about how good it was to have a screen with over 300 PPI as the eye can't see the pixels with that much PPI. They was also talking about how the PPI was more important than the screen size witch is funny as hell, because a Galaxy S4 with a 5 inch screen and 1080p resolution makes the iPhone 5S screen to looks like pile of trash.

Apple thinks the PPI is everything while it's just 1/4th out of what's important to see things good on a screen.

No, Apple NEVER said they were first at retina. Never. You claimed they did, and that makes you a troll.

Exynos said,

There was a HUUUUUUUUGE amount of talking from Apple about how good it was to have a screen with over 300 PPI as the eye can't see the pixels with that much PPI. They was also talking about how the PPI was more important than the screen size witch is funny as hell, because a Galaxy S4 with a 5 inch screen and 1080p resolution makes the iPhone 5S screen to looks like pile of trash.

Apple thinks the PPI is everything while it's just 1/4th out of what's important to see things good on a screen.

Are you sure you aren't confusing "screen size" with "resolution"?

-adrian- said,
Well the reason for that is that Retina is an apple marketing term that actually says nothing about resolution
I think of it more like Retina is a marketing term that conveys anything higher is superfluous. I.e., once it is "retina" the "average" eye would not be able to perceive a higher PPI and therefore there would be no benefit.

That's the way it is spun anyway.

stevan said,

No, Apple NEVER said they were first at retina. Never. You claimed they did, and that makes you a troll.


So can you prove it that they wasn't first with Retina type of displays?

Their keynote about iPhone 4 made everyone to think that, so i'm pretty happy to see you defense against this.

Exynos said,

So can you prove it that they wasn't first with Retina type of displays?

Their keynote about iPhone 4 made everyone to think that, so i'm pretty happy to see you defense against this.

Did they say it though? No...
That detail is very very important.

Shadrack said,
I think of it more like Retina is a marketing term that conveys anything higher is superfluous. I.e., once it is "retina" the "average" eye would not be able to perceive a higher PPI and therefore there would be no benefit.

That's the way it is spun anyway.

Yup yup exactly. I think it's easier to say "retina" display than "328 ppi (or whatever)" display. Everybody knows what it means, so I think they did pretty good crafting that marketing lingo.

Mobius Enigma said,
However, Apple should not have started the 'higher resolution' race, and they should no longer use misleading/meaningless terms like 'Retina Display'.

A company does not need to be top dog to drive competition. If the end result for consumers is better products, who exactly does it hurt here?

Secondly, if there isn't much of a discernible difference past a certain threshold, what does it matter then if they call it a Retina Display? All they're doing is suggesting that it has a decent resolution, which most people will not argue. If anything, they're smart to not make it another numbers game.

Exynos said,

There was a HUUUUUUUUGE amount of talking from Apple about how good it was to have a screen with over 300 PPI as the eye can't see the pixels with that much PPI. They was also talking about how the PPI was more important than the screen size witch is funny as hell, because a Galaxy S4 with a 5 inch screen and 1080p resolution makes the iPhone 5S screen to looks like pile of trash.

Apple thinks the PPI is everything while it's just 1/4th out of what's important to see things good on a screen.

Apple didn't make the "perfect" device so therefore it is a pile of trash. Yeah, as other's have called it: You just trolololololing.

Astra.Xtreme said,

Yup yup exactly. I think it's easier to say "retina" display than "328 ppi (or whatever)" display. Everybody knows what it means, so I think they did pretty good crafting that marketing lingo.

It conveys more meaning than "high definition". Put something that is "high definition" on a 60+ inch "HDTV" and I don't consider it very high definition (unless you are back something like 25 feet, then it probably wouldn't matter). Retina is a marketing term, just like "high definition" is a marketing term. Lots of folks who are perfectly fine with the term "high definition" get their panties in an absolute twist over Retina.

dead.cell said,

A company does not need to be top dog to drive competition. If the end result for consumers is better products, who exactly does it hurt here?

Secondly, if there isn't much of a discernible difference past a certain threshold, what does it matter then if they call it a Retina Display? All they're doing is suggesting that it has a decent resolution, which most people will not argue. If anything, they're smart to not make it another numbers game.

This. Apple advertises their features to non-technical people very well. For some reason this drives some of the self-described-tech-enthusiast here absolute nuts.

Nogib said,

Does lowering the intelligence bar make things better? No.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FL7yD-0pqZg

The funny thing about your post is the EVO was a terrible phone.

My wife had one (she went through 3, actually), and what absolute garbage it was (terrible battery life that couldn't get her through half a day, and it lagged like no other). When she was off contract, I gave her my iPhone 4 (in 2013, mind you) and she couldn't have been happier with it. Why?, Because it didn't lag like that crap EVO and the battery would last easily throughout the day. Smooth performance, nice display, and great battery life: What people really care about.

People who don't understand spec's through-and-through still need smart phones. I don't have a great understanding of automobile features, but guess what: I still need one to get to my job every day.

Exynos said,

So can you prove it that they wasn't first with Retina type of displays?

Their keynote about iPhone 4 made everyone to think that, so i'm pretty happy to see you defense against this.

They were first to call their display retina. They were not first to have a high pixel screen nor did they say that. Please stop trolling.

Astra.Xtreme said,

You said that IPS has bad viewing angles, which is absolutely false. All I was doing was correcting you on it. The GS3 has a super AMOLED display, and it had all sorts of issues with viewing angles. Or maybe that was attributed to it's crappy pentile arrangement. The GS4 obviously corrected those issues.

And AMOLED displays are only power efficient when the screen is black. And we all know that in real usage, that is not the case. That concept doesn't effect IPS displays, which is why they are more power efficient than AMOLED in "real-time" usage. There are plenty of studies out there that have proven it.

In virtually every resolution and new subpixel arrangement, AMOLED displays can be crap. That doesn't mean the slightly more mature versions of the new progression of the technology to also be crap.

I never claimed AMOLED was the best display technology, although it is far better than how you portrayed it.

Technically most Super AMOLED displays do have close to a full 180 degree viewing angle, which does 'technically' beat the 178 degree viewing angle of the iPhone IPS display panels.

I should offer a correction, as I assumed there were still more polarizing screen issues with the iPhone 5s, and I was off, as they have decreased from the iPhone 4s.

Even though the older iPhone displays 'technically' had a 178 degree viewing angle IPS panel, the filters on the iPhone reduced the angle considerably as the filters would color shift and partially obstruct the brightness. I think the effective viewing angle was closer to 155 degrees. (That number is from memory, so it could be higher or lower, but it isn't the full 178 degrees the panel was technically capable of providing.)

There is still a loss of viewing angle on the iPhone 5s from the panel's technical potential because of the filters, although I believe it is effectively around 170 degrees.

In comparison, a Nokia 928 with their AMOLED does offer nearly a full 180 degree viewing angle without loss of brightness or color shifting.

As for AMOLED needing 'black' to be more energy efficient, you are correct. However you are forgetting there are AMOLED WP8 devices where the OS is designed around a lot of blank 'black' space. It also allows for additional functionality that doesn't work as well on LCD screens, with the Nokia AMOLED devices offering features like Glance that powers on a few pixels all the time with negligible battery reduction.

So on an iPhone or Android device that doesn't use black backgrounds, the IPS/AMOLED difference is moot. On WP8 there is a difference, unless the user flips the OS to the White background mode.


There are a lot of good display technologies and a lot of promising new technologies coming out in the next couple of years.

Shadrack said,

It conveys more meaning than "high definition". Put something that is "high definition" on a 60+ inch "HDTV" and I don't consider it very high definition (unless you are back something like 25 feet, then it probably wouldn't matter). Retina is a marketing term, just like "high definition" is a marketing term. Lots of folks who are perfectly fine with the term "high definition" get their panties in an absolute twist over Retina.

I think most also have a problem with usage of HD. Especially considering when 480p HD exists. HD also doesn't convey how compressed the image is, and on and on.

TV providers take advantage of users by offering highly compressed 'HD' channels that are crap.


I personally like truth in advertising. If GM advertised the Corvette as having a 'Magical multi-cylinder engine', it would be worthless information, and they would be laughed out of the performance car industry. Yep Apple does this stuff in just as technical of a field and users let them get away with it a little too much.

Notice the posts around the internet where users are genuinely surprised when they find out the iPhone display resolution isn't the highest available. Just last week, I heard a talk show host that was fairly technical minded reference a 1080p phone and then mention that like 'always' the iPhone was still the highest resolution phone available.

If I want manipulation, I'll watch Derren Brown, not a new Apple marketing campaign.

Mobius Enigma said,

I personally like truth in advertising. If GM advertised the Corvette as having a 'Magical multi-cylinder engine', it would be worthless information, and they would be laughed out of the performance car industry. Yep Apple does this stuff in just as technical of a field and users let them get away with it a little too much.

Could you please provide an example of this "magical whatever" that Apple is advertising for us? It should be easy for you since you are asserting that they do this all the time. I think I agree with others here in that you seem to just make stuff up as you go along. Writing walls of text about absolute B.S. doesn't give your posts additional credibility, btw.

CSheep said,

Yes, it was. At least for my smallish hands...

You know what they say about small hands...? Small iPhone.

Not only was this, but a smaller Tablet (Mini!) never going to be made by them neither! So basically, they are 'Copying' from everybody but the pundits claim it is just 'Late to market!' Apple and corrupted judge & jury should never got away suing Samsung, less because of 'Rectangle with round corners' from Samsung's own photo frame!

agtsmith said,
Wasn't 3.5 inch screen "perfect"?

Yep. And all the other mfgrs where just pushing larger screens as a gimmick because they couldn't compete with the breathtaking perfection and innovation of the iPhone.

agtsmith said,
Wasn't 3.5 inch screen "perfect"?

Time changes, I remember when the Motorola MPX 200 with a 2.2" was considered a marvel of technology. And yes, I had it and enjoyed it.

Time changes, I remember when the Motorola MPX 200 with a 2.2" was considered a marvel of technology. And yes, I had it and enjoyed it.

That has nothing to do with it. iPhone's 3.5 inch screen was touted by Jobs "perfect" for use with with one hand and for long Samsung's 4+ inchers were ridiculed by the Apple community for that reason. Who's laughing now?

agtsmith said,

iPhone's 3.5 inch screen was touted by Jobs "perfect" for use with with one hand and for long Samsung's 4+ inchers were ridiculed by the Apple community for that reason. Who's laughing now?

Apple must have noticed over the last four years that people are buying 4"+ phones. There's clearly a market for them.

Not everyone likes giant phones... but there are plenty who do.

agtsmith said,

That has nothing to do with it. iPhone's 3.5 inch screen was touted by Jobs "perfect" for use with with one hand and for long Samsung's 4+ inchers were ridiculed by the Apple community for that reason. Who's laughing now?

In your opinion it does not. Again what was the optimum years ago can change when things evolve:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk

There's no way they would release an iPhone without Retina, at this point.
That has to be one of the worst Apple rumors I've heard in a while.

Enron said,
Non retina? I absolutely require retina or no sale.
Just hold it further. Lo and behold, Retina! Ain't magic grand?

Enron said,
Non retina? I absolutely require retina or no sale.

They'll call it retina by lowering the standards for retina, so you can be happy

mastercoms said,

They'll call it retina by lowering the standards for retina, so you can be happy
There are no "standards" for Retina in the first place, it's just an arbitrary thing. See how much the PPI varies even in diferent Apple "retina" displays.

Romero said,
There are no "standards" for Retina in the first place, it's just an arbitrary thing. See how much the PPI varies even in diferent Apple "retina" displays.

I believe the "unofficial" standard for Retina that Jobs said was around 300ppi when held 10-12 inches from your face.

Astra.Xtreme said,

I believe the "unofficial" standard for Retina that Jobs said was around 300ppi when held 10-12 inches from your face.
Which doesn't hold for all Apple devices with so-called "Retina" displays. Perhaps not you, but amazing how so many Apple device owners I've talked to proclaim that Retina is some sort of standard and even expect other manufacturers to follow suit. No end to stupidity in this world.

Romero said,
Which doesn't hold for all Apple devices with so-called "Retina" displays. Perhaps not you, but amazing how so many Apple device owners I've talked to proclaim that Retina is some sort of standard and even expect other manufacturers to follow suit. No end to stupidity in this world.

You're absolutely correct. I think the iPad Air has less than 300ppi, but is still considered Retina for some reason. I think it's stupid too, but it's easier to say Retina than the exact number.