> "The iPhone 4 wasn't interesting because it had x more DPI clocking in at a total of y; it was interesting, because they had achieved so many DPI that the ave

> "The iPhone 4 wasn't interesting because it had x more DPI clocking in at a total of y; it was interesting, because they had achieved so many DPI that the average person would not be able to discern the pixels." That measure of achievement is entirely dependent on the distance between the eyes and the screen. I went around measuring a couple of days, many people with smart phones already had non-discernible pixels at the distance they held them in late 2009, before the iPhone4 (by Apple's measure of non-discernible). Why pick one arbitrary distance over another and call that the interesting transition?