37 
Every year it’s the same rumour: “the new iPhone will have a 16:9 display.” It even circulated before the first iPhone came out, and happened with the iPad too. This year isn’t different. But does it make sense? Would the next iPhone really have a 16:9 screen?
This is the main question you should ask yourself. What good would a 16:9 screen bring to you, the user?
First, proponents of the 16:9 iPhone say that this is the “format of the future.” It’s the resolution of HD video, be it 720p or 1080p. TV shows are filmed in 16:9 format. Home video is filmed in 16:9 format. They claim that people want to see all this video without letterboxing—that people hate black bars on the top and bottom of their displays. They argue that a 16:9 format will allow the iPhone to use the whole screen when watching video of this kind.
But while a 16:9 screen would fit this content perfectly, it would also push that “problem” elsewhere. It will actually make it even bigger. There are tens of thousands of movies and videos filmed in other formats (both 4:3 and all kinds of panoramic aspect ratio). More importantly, there are hundreds of thousands of apps and video games that are not designed for 16:9. Even if scaled, that will bring letterboxing to a much broader range of content.
Advocates of a 16:9 iPhone also argue that a larger screen would also allow for more pixels and more information. This is true. But you don’t need a 16:9 proportion to get more pixels. You can have a 4-inch screen with more pixels that it is still 3:2.
The only thing that would make sense for a 16:9 display is a 1280 x 720 resolution, to match the standard 720p. Keeping the current 3.5-inch format, the resulting display density would be completely impossible to achieve with current technology. Pushing it to 4 inches, as some of the rumours say, would also result in an insane pixel-per-inch count: 367ppi. No other phone gets anywhere near there. There are 720p Androids out there, but they are 4.3-inch skateboards.
But let’s keep on going with this scenario and assume Apple’s suppliers can secretly produce a 367ppi, 4-inch 720p 16:9 display by shredding virgin unicorn ponies and compressing them inside their secret artificial black hole. What will be the cost in terms of battery life? As with the iPad, the impact of this display in the battery life of the iPhone would be monumental, thanks to the increase in graphic power demands, pixel activation, and backlighting.
Would you be happy to switch black bars in TV series for less battery life or a thicker, heavier iPhone? I’m sure Apple wouldn’t like to make that trade-off.
That new screen format would also introduce fragmentation into a platform that doesn’t have any right now. Zero. None. One iPhone format to rule them all will suddenly be divided and Apple will suddenly lose one of its key advantages over Android
Developers would have to rework all of their apps to work in both the new 16:9 phone and the huge installed base. There are gazillion units of iPhones 3G, 3GS, 4 and 4S out there. And their owners all keep buying new apps. A sudden change in aspect ratio will double developer costs for years to come. And, like I said before, letterboxing old apps is not a good option. They will look like crap and defeat the whole purpose.
So, for years to come, developers would have to maintain two user interface layouts, greatly increasing their costs. This is not like creating new higher resolution art to accomodate the increased density of the Retina display. That’s easy. Making new layouts for all current and future applications, however, would be much more dramatic.
The iPad and the iPhone have different aspect ratios now. 4:3 vs. 3:2. That’s not much of a problem, as the iPad apps have completely different layouts. It’s also not a big difference. Games, which are the apps that are more similar between platforms—are easily adaptable for both aspect ratios.
But, if the iPhone goes 16:9 for the sake of adopting the 720p standard, it would make sense for the iPad to go 16:9—or somewhere near that—too. If you adopt one logic to one product, you may as well adopt it for the other.
The problem is that a 16:9 iPad would be absolutely ridiculous.
That’s an idea that was repeated many times by Steve Jobs. He—and Tim Cook, for that matter—expressed his disgust with the 16:9 format on the iPad and the iPhone, saying that it doesn’t make much sense from a design point of view. Except for movies, it’s a format that doesn’t bring much benefit. And it’s actively bad for things like books and magazines.
The iPhone and the iPad, as Jobs said, were created after many years of brainstorming, planning and development. At the time, they truly believed they had found the magic formula. The market agreed and still agrees. Despite the variety of formats in the Android platform, despite the fact that big screen smartphones have found an audience, iOS keeps selling more and more, its sales increasing at a staggering rate. Even after so many years in the market, Apple’s formula keeps winning.
Why change it?
I can’t really think of a solid reason for such a change. The benefits of a 16:9 iPhone are little. The drawbacks for users and developers are many. So I can only only see two scenarios for this happening.
The first: Tim Cook sold the soul of all Apple employees to Satan in order to obtain a magic phone that defeats the limits of existing technology plus artificial intelligence to reformat all apps on the fly. That way, Apple will maintain the values that made the iPhone such a big success in the marketplace.
The second: Tim Cook and his cronies just went crazy. Maybe, in a misguided display of independence and change over the previous regime, Cook would make this drastic change, one that could kill their golden goose in the name of a feature that nobody is really demanding, neither consumers nor developers. For what? For escaping Jobs’s shadow? Does anyone want to escape Jobs’s shadow? If anything, I would imagine they are conducting ouija sessions in order to get advice from him from wherever his soul is now.
I don’t think Tim Cook is that kind of man. He is not crazy. And he wants to keep making easy money.
Report: The Bigger iPhone 5 May Have a Stretched-Out 16:9 Display
iPhone 5's 16:9 Ratio 4" Display Tech Supposedly Pictured
The Next iPhone Won't Be the iPhone 5
Step 1: Sit back
Step 2: Wait for hate fest
This is actually a good article from Jesus, with not just mere statements but also good reasons why he thinks it won’t be 16:9
I’m not a fan of most his articles (except his space items) and his fanatic view of Apple, but if he keeps writing like this I might actually change my mind about him.
Totally agree, don’t think it will make any difference though.
I actually considered changing the writer’s name on this article just for kicks, but thought it far better to try and change readers’ perception of Jesus instead.
Anyway, I agree that this is a really reasonable article from him. Glad you do too!
lol – you should have. Then let people know after all the comments were in.
I don’t mind Jesus; he can be a bit sensationalist, but then, that’s what most blogs are about. If you don’t like him, don’t read his articles!
Exactly. Though having said that, I still read the Daily Mail’s site occasionally, knowing full well it will only result in a soaring blood pressure and steam-exertion from my ears…
Totally with you Kat. I read Daily mail occasionally, it gives you a bit of perspective.
The comments section is fun!
Maybe you secretly changed it to Jesus to change our views on him!
Well played ma’am
There are a few opinions based on assumption, borderline contradictions etc. above that smell a little of Jesus (I might explain myself in a comment below); but certainly his output has been a lot more considered recently. (I don’t read the US site so either someone has had a word in his ear, he’s had an epiphany, or you’re doing a cracking job at being a human firewall – or a combination of more than one of those
)
I can handle him expressing an opinion I disagree with, and don’t mind the occasional slip-up in spelling/grammar (we all do it), so long as we see more pieces like the above (that appear to be written by someone halfway sane). At least he’s raising debate to the point that people can actually intelligently contest a viewpoint; rather than concentrating on calling him out for inflammatory, juvenile content or something trivial like grammar.
You’ll hear no complaints from me if he keeps this up!
Love the fact that I can always spot an article written by Jesus. Usually it’s obvious from the synopsis and if not I’ve usually decided after the first paragraph.
Think I agree on most points though, it doesn’t really seem to be very logical. Although it must be increasingly hard for the guys at Apple to not change the size of the iPhone and fight that overwelming desire to change something as time goes on.
Step 3: Profit???
Definitely a sensible analysis from Mr. Diaz. I agree that a 16:9 iPhone is a non-starter.
On what, Jesus, Apple, or a 16:9 iPhone?
All of them.
Who cares?
I want a phone that lasts longer than 24-36 hours, has near broadband speed internet, has a Siri type function that really works and maybe has a function that is so ‘kick-ass’ I haven’t even thought of it yet
Screen size, multiple processors, bezels, etc aren’t enticing me.
I agree, my phone is 16:9 anyway, I would prefer 3:2 its better for photos too plus I don’t mind the letter boxing.
Also not every video is 16:9, some may be 16:10 or 4:3. 3:2 fits nicely in between all of the ratios imo.
WWDC is less than 3 weeks away. All sorts of shit will fly around between now and then. Just remember to duck if some comes your way.
We’re still not even sure the next iPhone will be announced at WWDC. Personally, I’d be really surprised if it was announced before September.
People that argue against a phone with a larger screen, like the S2, the Galaxy Nexus, the S3 and at the most extreme, the Galaxy Note, just quite clearly haven’t actually -used- one of those phones.
The iPhone screen looks so dinky and small now in hindsight of using the S2. Even my Nexus One – which I previously would have ascribed an adequate screen size to – is like looking at a digital watch compared to the S2.
Screen size shouldn’t affect software if that software (and SDKs for it) is well made. Android caught onto this really early on and most Android software is designed to be completely abstract of the screen size – which not only benefits the larger screens on phones, but means the same software will also run on your tablets. Ultimately, it’s a crap argument that an iPhone with a bigger screen would suddenly mean the end of the App Store and cause Armageddon like fragmentation.
A legitimate argument may well be that the larger the phone, the more awkward it is to hold and use – especially for those with smaller hands. But the counter argument is that smaller phones are just as bad to hold and use for those of us with a larger hand size. I can use my S2 more comfortably than I ever was able to use my Nexus One. I never even ascribed the reason for that as being down to the size until I’d actually used the S2. If this is such a huge concern, surely the best response would be a two flavour iPhone 5 in both sizes to keep everyone happy? (Although, this is “you’ll like what we tell you to like” Apple, so that’s probably not likely).
Ultimately, I think a jump in screen size is inevitable for the iPhone. Its biggest competitors are, quite literally, the biggest on the market. Even a company as head strong as Apple has to recognise that the market is sending them a message as to what consumers want.
I suspect that one of the reasons Jesus wants to avoid iPhone fragmentation is then it won’t be so easy for him to do bogus Android Fragmentation stories
Congratulations on using the words “I think” in the title. At least for British readers, where subjective opinion is favoured over arrogant presumption. You can carry on omitting “I think” in the titles of your American website if you want.
While this is a good article from Mr Diaz he does make some indefensible statements, such as “A sudden change in aspect ratio will double developer costs for years to come”, what, having to change the layout of you app will mean you have to do everything twice, in 2 separate locations with 2 separate computers with 2 separate app developer accounts. Even assuming it will take a developer twice as long to design for the 2 formats, his time is not one of the major costs of App development.
If you draw your eyes up a bit, that’s one of the “assumptions” (to be kind) I was talking about. I also had to bite my tongue when I read the matter-of-fact assertion that all 4.3″ phones were ‘skateboards’.
I disagree with pretty much everything he said under the headings, “Battery Impact”, “Fragmentation” and “The iPad Conflict”, but it feels more palatable than usual because it reads more like an opinion piece rather than the work of an egotistical nutter on a digital soapbox.
This is a good thing.
Just wait until Apple launch a 4.3″ phone, it will suddenly become a revolutionary and magical breakthrough.
Definitely agree – portrayed as an opinion piece it’s quite good, so kudos to Kat or whoever it was that put the “I Think” in the title when they brought it over. I do disagree on some of his points (especially the one you mention), but I feel that’s allowed when its opinion. I also have issue with the suggestion that change of this sort is bad. Granted it’ll take a couple of years during which time developers will have to develop for both, but it worked fine on the iPad with most developers happy to support both screen sizes, and if there’s legitimate long-term gain (which Apple would obviously believe there would be to make the change), then I don’t think they’d be afraid of the short-term inconvenience.
I wasn’t aware that the “I Think” was added, but whoever did it, well done for a smart move as it defused many of the arguments that people would have against this article.
There has been some other subtle changes, such as removing the word stupid from the first para.
Ok guys, surely you have better things to be doing than analysing every single difference from the US and UK sites’ versions of this post?
Errrr…. nope.
I sure people are only pointing it out to say what a good job the Editor of this site did to modify the original article, now if only we knew who that was
Think of it as being a 3-Step recovery program. The mood has gone from adversarial, angry & at times unfair and simmered down to one of polite, measured analysis of how much better this all is than we’re used to. Soon (with any luck) it will almost be as though we don’t even notice the author except to gush about particularly exemplary output.
Progress is progress!
“A sudden change in aspect ratio will double developer costs for years to come”
I’d like to propose a new SI unit for hyperbole – The Diaz.
However, the picodiaz and nanodiaz will suffice for everyday usage.
example of a yottadiaz?
To be an SI unit it must have a clear and exact definition and must be derived from a already known and unchanging value like the speed of light or another SI unit. please formulate your definition of the Diaz in these terms, providing examples to aid clarity. We can’t just go pulling figures out of the air, that’s Jesus’s job
The ‘Python – Four Yorkshiremen’ measure of hyperbole is simply four Yorkshiremens, i.e. 4 x 85kg = 340kg. One Diaz is 15.55789 metric Python – Four Yorkshiremens, i.e. 15.55789 x 340kg = 5289.6826kg.
Have this people complaining about letterboxing never heard of autofit? It might stretch the picture, but it gets rid of the black bars (which are certainly more unpleasant). If they do go 16:9, they need a massive screen, and that’s just not going to happen. Actually, I wouldn’t be surprised if they do try something like this on the Touch seeing as that’s nothing more than a side show to the iPhone so they can get away with a few blunders (but still sell it in ridiculous quantities, mind).
And whilst it would improve watching a movie, everything else is compromised. I wouldn’t foresee adding to the fragmentation being too much of an issue, but rather the overall experience on the phone would feel unnatural. As Diaz has pointed out before, the design of phones replicates what we expect of paper. If someone gave me a sheet of paper that was 16:9, I’d sit waiting for the rest of it. Navigating the device – the aspect to which the iPhone was invented to revolutionise – would take a major hit as they’re introducing something completely alien to consumers that they MUST get used to. If you don’t like Siri, for instance, you can just not use it – this isn’t so easily accomplishable with an aspect ratio. Then there’s the fact that photos are mostly 3:2 so you’d ruin the experience of looking at all of them lovely pics, and the “golden ratio” is closer to 3:2 than 16:9 further supporting that the former is just generally more appealing.
3 words: not gonna happen.
Jesus wept.
I can honestly say, this is an articulate, well written piece, stimulating healthy debate, devoid of the usual brain fart narcissim. More stuff like this and I will gladly change my opinion of you Lord Diaz.
The fragmentation is what I believed to be the reason it’s not gonna happen, now I have a few more reasons.
Is it pronounced Jesus or like “Hesoos”?
I suspect the latter rather than the former
The latter, yep.
I wouldn’t be surprised if they make the screen invisible when not in use so it doesn’t matter if it is displaying 3×2 or 16×9 ratio images as there won’t be any black bars.
This gives developers a much longer time period to redevelop for 16×9 if they wish to.
Regardless of how this turns out, Jonny Ive was knighted today. Doesn’t the final design rest on his shoulders?
I hope the next iPhone does something about that advanced haptic feedback that Apple are currently experimenting with.
I don’t believe for a minute the next iPhone will be 16:9. If it is, it will be a sign of Apple moving away from Steve’s blueprint.
Except whatever they release, Steve will have worked on it before he died.
Any tech company that doesn’t move with the times might as well give up trading. Even Steve was subject to the whims of his customers, despite the fact that Apple are experts at coming up with products that scream ‘This is how we designed it, so you *will* like it’.
“Games, which are the apps that are more similar between platforms—are easily adaptable for both aspect ratios.”
How is a game anymore adaptable than any other app?
It’s not. In fact, I think it’s worse for a game.
Imagine a text-based app that scrolls vertically, as many such apps do. This app will require little or no modification, as a taller screen simply means that more of that vertically scrolling data is displayed at once. The button and title bars at the top and bottom of the screen remain the same. Those UI elements are a standard part of iOS.
Games are often created with custom graphics and controls, and often support only one orientation. The developer has to make considered decisions about the positioning of the various controls in different aspect ratios. To my mind, this requires *more* effort than most other apps.
Exactly. I don’t even think anything needs to be added to that reply, thanks.
*cough* 9:16 *cough*
“Despite the variety of formats in the Android platform, despite the fact that big screen smartphones have found an audience, iOS keeps selling more and more, its sales increasing at a staggering rate. Even after so many years in the market, Apple’s formula keeps winning.
Why change it?”
Am I the only person who’s noticed what’s wrong here? Android outsells iOS and is increasing its market share at a faster rate than is Apple.
Must disengage reality distortion field, Jesus. Try it – just for one day.