Next-Gen iPhone & iPhone Nano Speculation
- Thread starter Arun
- Start date
From experience, a 3.7/3.8 inch screen is a noticeable improvement over a 3.5 inch screen. I think it very likely that iPhone 5 will up the screen size as rumoured.
I'm currently using a Motorola Defy with a 3.7" screen and must say I'm increasingly tempted to look for a phone with a 4 inch screen! I do think that phones with the 4.3" screens are a bit unwieldy, however.
I'm currently using a Motorola Defy with a 3.7" screen and must say I'm increasingly tempted to look for a phone with a 4 inch screen! I do think that phones with the 4.3" screens are a bit unwieldy, however.
Sorry im a bit late on this..but could they dual source from two Foundry's which use entirely different tech? AFAIK Samsung's 28nm process is based on GF's Gate first approach while TSMC is Gate last. Could result in widely different performance and/or power and you cant have a phone shipping with different performance and/or battery life can you?
Anyway back to the iphone i still find it extremely odd that they completely missed their regular launch window this time around. Especially considering the SoC was actually ready a month earlier this year compared to last year (Ipad launched early April 2010 and Ipad 2 launched early March 2011). And given the rumours that there are no major changes to the form factor otherwise, i wonder what they're upto (i.e. maybe the rumours are wrong)
ltcommander.data
Regular
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20110915PD211.html
Apparently Apple & TSMC have a done deal for both 28nm and 20nm, A6 and A7. Macrumours is taking that to mean the possibility of the A7 being 20nm, but that would seem aggressive to only use the 28nm process for 1 generation. And given the 28nm process delays, Apple would need a backup plan on 28nm for the A7 if the 20nm process doesn't come online as scheduled (H2 2012 I believe)
Apparently Apple & TSMC have a done deal for both 28nm and 20nm, A6 and A7. Macrumours is taking that to mean the possibility of the A7 being 20nm, but that would seem aggressive to only use the 28nm process for 1 generation. And given the 28nm process delays, Apple would need a backup plan on 28nm for the A7 if the 20nm process doesn't come online as scheduled (H2 2012 I believe)
I'm as confident as I can be, that the next iOS chip will not contain rogue. If Apple sticks with convention, they'll launch a new ipad around march/april. Thats far too early to have rogue in the field. That would also imply that any iphone launched late next year will not have Rogue, as they'll be using the same chip.
Only thing to put a fly in that ointment, is if next gen ipad contains the same A5, meaning the new chip would see first light in the 2012 iphone.
My expectation is that the next chip will have higher clocking 5XT graphics.
I don't see why the idea in the title of the thread couldn't work. I mean, if the new iPhone/iPod Touch use a 4 inch display as rumored, Apple could also put out models with slightly smaller screens than the current ones (say, 3.3 inch), make the devices as small as possible, and market the two sizes side by side as different models of the same families, like they've done with their iMac and Macbook lines. The smaller units could also be a bit cheaper and maybe even come in colors, serving as nano-like additions to the iOS family, while avoiding any problems of feature disparity.
Last edited by a moderator:
Performance might becomes an issue if the legendary double res ipad is a reality.
But what is using that performance now outside of a few games and benchmarks?
In fact, all games probably will support older iPads, older iPhones/iPod Touches so are they using up all the graphics capabilities now?
So if the graphics performance is a half or a quarter because of the increase in resolution, where will that be noticed outside of benchmarks? If scrolling and transitions are affected or popular games like Angry Birds are noticeably worse, then performance will be an issue.
In fact, all games probably will support older iPads, older iPhones/iPod Touches so are they using up all the graphics capabilities now?
So if the graphics performance is a half or a quarter because of the increase in resolution, where will that be noticed outside of benchmarks? If scrolling and transitions are affected or popular games like Angry Birds are noticeably worse, then performance will be an issue.
Who says that GPU blocks sit idle outside of 3D in iOS? Nonetheless any SoC is a collection of a multitude of different processors. The more balanced those processors are between them the better.
What other options did Apple have for the A5 outside of the MP2? Two more A9 cores maybe? What would they have done with that with something like Infinity Blade for instance? Increase texture resolutions and add MSAA maybe? I don't think so.
For each design decision there are obviously advantages and disadvantages. But I don't see Apple to have any overall better options to get the iPad2 to stick out of the bunch of any other tablet designs.
If resolution increases for their next iPad and the SoC should increase somewhat in performance it'll probably be again enough to follow a similar trend as with Infinity Blade for example.
What other options did Apple have for the A5 outside of the MP2? Two more A9 cores maybe? What would they have done with that with something like Infinity Blade for instance? Increase texture resolutions and add MSAA maybe? I don't think so.
For each design decision there are obviously advantages and disadvantages. But I don't see Apple to have any overall better options to get the iPad2 to stick out of the bunch of any other tablet designs.
If resolution increases for their next iPad and the SoC should increase somewhat in performance it'll probably be again enough to follow a similar trend as with Infinity Blade for example.
ltcommander.data
Regular
Well 3D could be important if they want to come at console gaming from the side by pushing AirPlay/HDMI out gaming. Or whether they intend to come at console gaming more directly in the next Apple TV box or much rumoured actual TV with all Apple services integrated since these devices will no doubt continue using Apple designed SoCs.
I haven't the vaguest idea what kind of IMG VXD they've used for the A5, but it sounds more like that they haven't exploited yet its full potential due to other restrictions. More like a sw cap than anything else.
That's the most recent one: http://www.imgtec.com/News/Release/index.asp?NewsID=597 which I don't think has made it into the A5, but the maximum frequency on any VXD whitepapers I've seen don't exceed 266MHz in frequency with 25MHz being the lowest for the most simple standards.
Here's the VXD370 description: http://www.imgtec.com/corporate/newsdetail.asp?NewsID=312 where up to A4 they've used a VXD375.
With the volumes Apple is dealing and considering the 30% revenue cut developers get in their applications store, it's anything but an unattractive deal for game developers/ISVs. There's no dilemma between devoting hypothetically more fixed function video decoding hw because it's most likely already there and eventually keeping 3D performance on the same level.
Actually I expect that they won't change much if anything for their next batch of SoCs in the GPU block; they'll most likely just increase the frequency and get the additional 3D performance nearly for free due to a smaller manufacturing process.
I haven't followed the TV rumors much but heard some speculations on a podcast, not based on any sources.
Only reason to get into a low-commodity TV business, especially for Apple which likes their high margins, would be to bring values and features you can't get anywhere else. I don't think simply AirPlay capabilities or the access to the iTunes video content would be enough, unless the premium over other TVs was minimal. It's not like AppleTV is a huge hit, or for that matter licensed AirPlay electronics like speakers and receivers.
They'd have to bring new features. One suggestion would be an integrated camera not just for FaceTime but to enable Kinect-type of functionality so that gestures would control the whole thing.
Hmm, if they did that and it was a hit, it would be a very short jump to gaming. The whole, iPad and iPhone are lousy for gaming control issue would be rendered mostly moot. Of course MS would blow a stack and there might be a big lawsuit.
Only reason to get into a low-commodity TV business, especially for Apple which likes their high margins, would be to bring values and features you can't get anywhere else. I don't think simply AirPlay capabilities or the access to the iTunes video content would be enough, unless the premium over other TVs was minimal. It's not like AppleTV is a huge hit, or for that matter licensed AirPlay electronics like speakers and receivers.
They'd have to bring new features. One suggestion would be an integrated camera not just for FaceTime but to enable Kinect-type of functionality so that gestures would control the whole thing.
Hmm, if they did that and it was a hit, it would be a very short jump to gaming. The whole, iPad and iPhone are lousy for gaming control issue would be rendered mostly moot. Of course MS would blow a stack and there might be a big lawsuit.
That would be hard for Microsoft, considering Apple already has patents covering a "kinect"-like way of controlling a device.
But Apple could make the Apple TV relevant if they managed to get all major studios on board for both movies and series at a flat rate price of $15-20 a month. They just need to provide better content than Netflix and Hulu, which really isn't hard.
Streaming content is definitely the way forward.
Won't happen.
Such a deal would undermine their deals with cable and satellite and probably hurt DVD/Blu-Ray sales as well -- if you can stream any show or movie at any time, why buy discs, even years after release when they may be at bargain basement prices.
Plus the studios are wary of handing Apple another potential blockbuster, at prices which are a fraction of what they currently get on cable and satellite.
Such a deal would undermine their deals with cable and satellite and probably hurt DVD/Blu-Ray sales as well -- if you can stream any show or movie at any time, why buy discs, even years after release when they may be at bargain basement prices.
Plus the studios are wary of handing Apple another potential blockbuster, at prices which are a fraction of what they currently get on cable and satellite.
Well, I can see it happen. It's not just limited to the Apple TV but for iTunes content. Heck, they already got Disney
