3 ms·

That screen will most definitely be 960x480. Apple prides itself on keeping the iPhone dev simple, so the simplest thing to do is simply upscale everything 2x.

That screen will most definitely be 960x480. Apple prides itself on keeping the iPhone dev simple, so the simplest thing to do is simply upscale everything 2x. Apps with old bitmap resources will still look ok and in order to take advantage of the new screen, developers will simply have to update their apps with higher-res images. Edit: Sorry for the brainfart, I did mean 960x640 (current screen x2).

proee 17y ago
I wonder if new apps written for 960x480 be backwards compatible then?
- roc 17y ago
  I'd imagine it's up to the developer to support different resolutions; like with iPad apps.
- Perceval 17y ago
  Apple has been working on resolution independence in its OS for several versions now. Didn't make it into Tiger, Leopard, or Snow Leopard. Maybe we're finally going to see the fruits of resolution independence in iPhone OS first?
adolph 17y ago
Uh? Current: 480x320 Proposed: 960x480 320 / 480 = 0.666666667 480 / 960 = 0.5 EDIT: Gruber says 960 × 640 I bet whoever lost that thing wishes they had signed up for MobileMe...
- mbreese 17y ago
  From the article, it looks like it was remote wiped before anyone could play with the new OS.
  - adolph 17y ago
    Yeah, they did. I was thinking about the "find my phone" feature.
    - mbreese 17y ago
      Good point. If I were in their position, the first thing I would have done was to pull the SIM card to stop Apple from killing the device. You'd think that Apple would have these constantly sending their GPS coordinates out so you could have tracked it the moment it left the Apple campus. However, in this case I think Apple has a pretty clear idea of where the device currently is :).
orangecat 17y ago
Impressive if true. That would give it a density of 326 pixels per inch, which is higher than everything here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_density http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_densi....
mortenjorck 17y ago
I still see that high a resolution as very unlikely (assuming you meant the Gruber number of 640x960). The iPhone 2G–3GS all have a 163 ppi pixel density, while the iPad has only 132 ppi. Doubling each dimension of the iPhone's 320x480 pixels would result in four times the pixel information across the same area—making for a massive 652 ppi, nearly five times the density of the iPad, and well over twice what is generally considered sufficient for print resolution. Much more likely is a 480x720 display, which would yield about 360 ppi.
- gjm11 17y ago
  Uh, ppi scales linearly with pixel size; it's "pixels per inch", not "pixels per square inch" or anything of the sort. So if existing iPhones are 163ppi and this is 2x as many pixels on each axis in the same space, that would be ~326ppi, not 652. [EDITED to fix off-by-one errors in the resolutions]

proee 17y ago

I wonder if new apps written for 960x480 be backwards compatible then?

roc 17y ago
I'd imagine it's up to the developer to support different resolutions; like with iPad apps.
Perceval 17y ago
Apple has been working on resolution independence in its OS for several versions now. Didn't make it into Tiger, Leopard, or Snow Leopard. Maybe we're finally going to see the fruits of resolution independence in iPhone OS first?

adolph 17y ago

Uh? Current: 480x320 Proposed: 960x480 320 / 480 = 0.666666667 480 / 960 = 0.5 EDIT: Gruber says 960 × 640 I bet whoever lost that thing wishes they had signed up for MobileMe...

mbreese 17y ago
From the article, it looks like it was remote wiped before anyone could play with the new OS.
- adolph 17y ago
  Yeah, they did. I was thinking about the "find my phone" feature.
  - mbreese 17y ago
    Good point. If I were in their position, the first thing I would have done was to pull the SIM card to stop Apple from killing the device. You'd think that Apple would have these constantly sending their GPS coordinates out so you could have tracked it the moment it left the Apple campus. However, in this case I think Apple has a pretty clear idea of where the device currently is :).

orangecat 17y ago

Impressive if true. That would give it a density of 326 pixels per inch, which is higher than everything here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_density http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_densi....

mortenjorck 17y ago

I still see that high a resolution as very unlikely (assuming you meant the Gruber number of 640x960). The iPhone 2G–3GS all have a 163 ppi pixel density, while the iPad has only 132 ppi. Doubling each dimension of the iPhone's 320x480 pixels would result in four times the pixel information across the same area—making for a massive 652 ppi, nearly five times the density of the iPad, and well over twice what is generally considered sufficient for print resolution. Much more likely is a 480x720 display, which would yield about 360 ppi.

gjm11 17y ago
Uh, ppi scales linearly with pixel size; it's "pixels per inch", not "pixels per square inch" or anything of the sort. So if existing iPhones are 163ppi and this is 2x as many pixels on each axis in the same space, that would be ~326ppi, not 652. [EDITED to fix off-by-one errors in the resolutions]