Apple Unveils the Next iPhone

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]LaHawzel[/nom]What's with these people commenting before any info is actually released? :|EDIT> "iPad is 91% of all tablet web traffic! [citation needed] Tim says 'I don't know what these other tablets are doing! They must be in warehouses or store shelves or maybe in peoples' bottom drawer.'"Oh I don't know, maybe because my tablet browser (and just about all the other android tablets) looks like a desktop browser to websites because of the User Agent.[/citation]
you are correct these request desktop sites so this data is completely wrong
 
[citation][nom]fuzznarf[/nom]I'll buy one. But only because my 3GS is old. And being a software developer, writing IOS apps is faster, more standardized, and more lucrative than Andriod apps unfortunately.[/citation]
Faster I create apps for both and I can tell you android is ALOT faster than IOS, hell massive librarys already exist for android and its easy to secure android apps, developers are too lazy thats all
 
[citation][nom]lpedraja2002[/nom]Weird, no indication on the amount of RAM this phones has :s This is quite a disappointment for a new iPhone. Samsung really outdid themselves with the Galaxy S3.[/citation]
As it can't do any real multitasking, it doesn't really matter.
Besides, all the figures in this presentation were pulled straight from Tim Crook's (sic) rear end, as there is no independent confirmation or benchmarks to back them up.
 
As much as I dislike Apple products (they made it pretty easy, too), I have to admit that aesthetically the iPhone 4 and it's variant were a lot better looking than this one. Stretching the device in just one direction made it look deformed.
 

It says they kept the same width and maybe didn't think the screen needed a larger DPI. So sticking with the old 640 y-resolution, they just made it pretty much a 16:9 (widescreen) screen as it seems so: 640 * (16/9) ~= 1,138 (and for some reason they chose 1136 which there might be a reason behind it). Maybe a lot of people were demanding good movie viewing on the iPhone (and/or iTouch). Now you wouldn't have to choose between snipping off the sides of the video just to see it better or seeing it all but smaller on the screen due to not using all of the screen. I hope what I said was understandable.

This might make it a little unsatisfying with apps unless they (could) actually make widescreen apps/versions. But aside from that, It seems like you'd get the same screen and resolution size for the apps even if there are black borders since the screen did become longer and not...thinner if you get what I'm saying. :)


It said that they kept the width the same since they want it to be able to fit in your hand. I wonder if they're just trying to stay away from how some phones like the Galaxy SIII and Galaxy Note look, or if a lot of people (there are varying hand sizes, and you know what they say about... Oops... I'm deviating... 😛) with big phone screens like what those two have, do have difficulty/discomfort holding/handling them.


Maybe it meant that they sold 17M from April-June, but sold 84M iPads so far... I'm not sure but 84M sounds a little too...little compared to what my faint memories are telling me. Maybe they're referring to The New iPad only? I wonder...
 
[citation][nom]santfu[/nom]You do know that the cortex a processors are an ARM license often made by Samsung for Apple. How exactly is that an argument for Apple being innovative.[/citation]
im not mentioning anything innovation aren't I? what i meant is from performance point of view, which from many benches we already saw literally blows away anything android devices has to offer.

once again, im not apple fanboy, just a casual fella who use htc desire for phone and an ipad 2 as tablet
 
[citation][nom]santfu[/nom]You do know that the cortex a processors are an ARM license often made by Samsung for Apple. How exactly is that an argument for Apple being innovative.[/citation]
You do know that Apple internally designs and develops their iphone/ipad processors, don't you? They've made multiple acquisitions of ARM processor design teams for quite some time (like over the past decade and a half) to develop that expertise in-house. They only have some other fab produce the processors once they've settled on the design since Apple doesn't have scale-fabs. I don't really like Apple that much, but they have made some "innovation" on their own proprietary ARM chips. On the other hand, I don't see what that's gotten them that a "standard" ARM platform can't these days...
 
[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]The vast majority of the world doesn't even have a 4-32Mb/s down connection. Going past maybe 32Mb/s is rare except in a few Asian and European countries. I could easily call 150Mb/s ultra fast, especially for a mobile phone, albeit it's unlikely to go that high most of the time in most places.[/citation]
That 150Mbps is for WiFi, there is nothing ground-breaking here, apart from the marketing term.
 
[citation][nom]jean 1990[/nom]im not mentioning anything innovation aren't I? what i meant is from performance point of view, which from many benches we already saw literally blows away anything android devices has to offer.once again, im not apple fanboy, just a casual fella who use htc desire for phone and an ipad 2 as tablet[/citation]
No Apple stats are distorted they will be meaning all ipads, I dont understand this, I sell tablets and Mobile phones fora job and the Samsung Tabs out sell the ipads 5-1
 
[citation][nom]teh_chem[/nom]You do know that Apple internally designs and develops their iphone/ipad processors, don't you? They've made multiple acquisitions of ARM processor design teams for quite some time (like over the past decade and a half) to develop that expertise in-house. They only have some other fab produce the processors once they've settled on the design since Apple doesn't have scale-fabs. I don't really like Apple that much, but they have made some "innovation" on their own proprietary ARM chips. On the other hand, I don't see what that's gotten them that a "standard" ARM platform can't these days...[/citation]
You do realize the A5 chip is about 6 times larger than any other and the A6 is only slightly smaller but the power draw is huge from the A6, also the A6 does not have Bluetooth, wifi, GPS or GLONASS on die like the M4 pro from qualcomm has and the M4 pro has already blown the A6 out of the water in performance, I mean TI's new (under wraps) OMAP 6 Arm Chip was leaked with independent benchmarks, where the dual core Slammed the Exynos 4 chip into oblivion, but no NFC and no HD wtf is apple doing, i think they don't have the know how really to implement NFC and that screen size is WEIRD!
 
Ratio for the screen looks terrible on this but what do you expect from crapple? Interesting to see how the whole metal back works out...something tells me another "you're holding it wrong" campaign is in the works.
 
[citation][nom]leeashton[/nom]You do realize the A5 chip is about 6 times larger than any other and the A6 is only slightly smaller but the power draw is huge from the A6, also the A6 does not have Bluetooth, wifi, GPS or GLONASS on die like the M4 pro from qualcomm has and the M4 pro has already blown the A6 out of the water in performance, I mean TI's new (under wraps) OMAP 6 Arm Chip was leaked with independent benchmarks, where the dual core Slammed the Exynos 4 chip into oblivion, but no NFC and no HD wtf is apple doing, i think they don't have the know how really to implement NFC and that screen size is WEIRD![/citation]
Don't get me wrong--I'm not saying that Apple's proprietary ARM platform is inherently superior to current other offerings (and in fact, I even pointed out at the end of my statement that it's generally not necessarily more advanced than any other standard ARM platforms). I was mainly correcting the incorrect assumption that most people have where Apple just buys established processors from someone else--when in actuality, they spent a lot of time and money developing their own in-house. I would call that more innovative than a lot of other hardware vendors that just assemble available components. The thing is, despite on-paper power-consumption numbers, iphones have typically been at the top of "hours of usage" table. In fact, one of the major reasons why Apple decided to bring the processor-development in-house was to make a more-efficient chip. And what does bringing the BT/wifi/GPS on the CPU die bring you when you're engineering your own platform? Not much. The assumption it sounds like you're making (and apologies if it's not) is that one could simply swap in the M4 for the A5X/A6X and have a better platform--except that's not true since Apple engineered around the entire platform, not just the CPU. It's like pointing to the Xenos GPU in the XBOX 360 5 years ago and saying that it sucked because it only had 500MHz operating frequency, when the desktop cards had near-1GHZ operating frequencies and graphically-crushed it in terms of numbers. It doesn't matter since the platform was specifically-designed, and you don't have to make compromises because of bulk-decisions in bulk-processors.

Okay, now don't take the the wrong way--I'm not saying that Apple or the new iphone are innovative as a whole (and I don't really care for Apple as a whole all that much), but where it's warranted, I would take issue with clearly false or inaccurate claims like the one I replied to.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom