Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Iphone Apple

Next iPhone — Front-Facing Camera, A4 Processor 327

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the yes-have-some dept.
As a quarter million pre-orderers wait for their iPad on Saturday, the millions of iPhone users can start speculating in earnest about the next gen iPhone. The rumors start by saying "It will be dubbed the 'iPhone HD' and will include a double resolution display, a front facing camera, multitasking support, and the blazing A4 processor."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Next iPhone — Front-Facing Camera, A4 Processor

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Not so HD ? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Jack Zombie (637548) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:15AM (#31670044)

    The video camera could be HD and shoot at 720p.

  • Re:Not so HD ? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Sandbags (964742) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:15AM (#31670058) Journal

    Internally, 420p is completely plausible. however, that's not the idea... With NFC, and an appropriate receiver (or a simple dock and cable) 1080p connection to a TV is completely within reason. Further, a tiny adjustment to the mini displayport on upcoming mac notebooks (and PCs as well, since it's part of the standard), and video in to a notebook through playback on an iPod/iPhone is completely plausible.

  • by fermion (181285) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:21AM (#31670152) Homepage Journal
    Perhaps it is because the phones are changing so much, but Apple does not seem to be keeping to their traditional 3 years of useful life policy. I had to replace my first gen iPhone because the 3.0 software, released only two years after the iPhone, ran like a dog. Unlike a general purpose computer, the new OS get pushed through the synch process so there is little hope of keeping it off.

    With the iPad and probably a new iPhone leveraging much more computing power, I can imagine an iPhone 4.0 software that will also make the current iPhones run like dogs, and I would not be surprised to see such an OS by the end of this year. This would not be so much of an issue but most of us sign two year contracts, but the OS seems to make hardware obsolete in 18 months. I sure wish that Apple would let us pay 50 dollars for to reduce the contract terms to one year. That is what I used to with phones.

  • Screen resolution (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Xest (935314) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:23AM (#31670188)

    If this is true then it's really no suprise, particularly regarding the screen resolution.

    Many pointed out the issue of having to cater to different screen sizes with Android and touted the iPhone as a superior platform for development because it's hardware is static.

    I've long said that it's not realistically going to stay that way, with the iPhone you already have differences between existing models that you must cater too in terms of performance and certain features. It's not suprising that resolution is now something you will also have to deal with, because the iPhone was already running at half the resolution of the likes of the Nexus One.

    Of course, you might say that Apple will automatically scale apps, which is an option, but that just means the apps wont be making any use of the higher resolution.

    It'll be interesting to see how Apple handles this, and with the iPad coming too, developers for Apple's platform are going to have to cater to differences just as with Android, and just as developers of desktop apps have always had to.

    Realistically it could only ever be a pipe dream to keep the hardware static, else the phone would simply get dated and no other platforms based on the technology (i.e. the iPad) could ever be released. If this is true it's really a vindication of the fact that if you want your platform to advance, and stay relevant, there's no hiding behind the supposed advantage of having a static hardware platform for the sake of easier development. Developers are going to have to work and deal with differences over time regardless whether they're developing for Windows, Android or the iPhone.

    Do any iPhone developers here know whether this means existing applications might have to be updated to support different resolutions? It'll be a massive job if so, so I'm guessing by default the new iPhone will indeed just scale graphics or something to start with unless an application specifically handles differing resolutions?

  • Re:Hopefully Not (Score:5, Interesting)

    by DJRumpy (1345787) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:27AM (#31670274)

    Here here. There is no need for Flash on a touch phone for starters (it just doesn't work), it kills the battery on pretty much any non-ac powered device, and HTML 5 looks far more promising to me.

    As to the rumored phone features, I'm 'meh' about the higher resolution (pixel density is already good for that size screen) although it would make converting DVD's a bit easier as I wouldn't have to resize from the stock resolutions. The front facing camera will make self portraits a bit easier. I don't have any plans to utilize video chat. I never use it on my PC's, and I doubt I would ever use it on a phone.

    Most of these selling points just seem like must haves just because someone thought they sounded like a good idea and not because they really add a 'must have' feature. I dont' know how much real world value they will bring but I'll reserve judgement until I see one. I also don't use any apps that require multi-tasking outside of the core apps, although I suppose listening to streaming radio might be a nice change from my own tunes at the gym. I think the only multi-tasking I would find handy is answering a text message without having to exit what I'm currently in. Happens at the gym fairly often. Minor inconvenience.

    I'm also satisfied with the speed on the 3GS, so I don't know what the A4 will bring to the table. Possibly to better handle video chat? I suppose the only item of interest for me are the rumors of 4G support, and hopefully 'N' wireless.

  • Re:Hopefully Not (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Abcd1234 (188840) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:39AM (#31670486) Homepage

    Yup, you're almost certainly right. But I wouldn't be averse to Flash being pushed more into the margins, and if the iPhone and iPad help that happen, great! Meanwhile, for some of those niche applications, like Hulu, a custom-written app for the device is probably a better solution than an embedded flash player, anyway.

  • Re:Hopefully Not (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Vectormatic (1759674) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:46AM (#31670626)

    just to add what other responses have left out: Flash also poses a significant security problem. These days most exploits target either the browser directly, or flash/pdf.

    As others have said, Adobe wouldnt be able to code themselves out of a wet paper bag, yet their software runs on 99.9% of internet connected computers, which poses a threat in terms of security.

    Not to mention the fact that flash adds are off course, the devil

  • Re:Flash? Unlocked? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:47AM (#31670660) Homepage Journal

    Adobe can't code their way out of a wet paper bag unless it's x86 Windows. So honest to $deity I hope not.

    What? Adobe can't code on Windows, either. There was a time when they could do it on the Mac, but that ended about the time System 7 came out.

    If you look at what flash does, and compare it to some other similar system, you'll find it doesn't do much and it's horribly inefficient at what it does. There are loads of game engines which have been melded with a scripting engine which do the same kind of stuff at much higher levels of performance, probably mostly because they're not reinventing wheels. They're using standard libraries for drawing and they're using existing scripting engines like Lua and Python, meaning they don't have to try to make an efficient, optimized scripting engine either. If Adobe had gone with one of these languages instead of inventing their own, the world would be a better place today. Or at least, the web would.

  • by Lumpy (12016) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:49AM (#31670690) Homepage

    and you N900 is also dog slow., herky jerky and has phone problems. I loved my N900, but I need a phone first and a pocket PC second. I had cell tower hand-off problems, Bluetooth connectivity with my car sucked (have to reboot N900 after EVERY call to make another call through the car's hands free bluetooth, Damn Ford and BMW and their non standard Bluetooth that works with all other phones INCLUDING older Nokias!) The interface get's slow at times making you wait, AND I experienced lockups at times.

    I had to have a phone that worked with my bluetooth and worked as a phone 100% of the time. the N900 is not useable for that. Sadly my friends iPhone did not have problems with using the car's bluetooth integration, and he does not have lockups or loss of cellphone reception in many places. Yes I checked... my kichen, N900 = no signal his iphone 2 bars. walk to living room 5 bars, N900 still no signal for 30-60 seconds..... OH there it is! I get 3 bars! WOOOO!

    I'm seriously thinking of selling my N900 on ebay and getting an iPhone or a Nexus 1

  • Re:Flash? Unlocked? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Vectormatic (1759674) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @10:52AM (#31670766)

    No Flash on extremely popular devices is a good thin. It forces people to stop using Flash where there's no reason to use it, such as navigation and video.

    you dont even need an iphone type device for that. A year and a half back i worked on a webshop, and the program manager had me make a jpg/javascript fall back for the flash menu because google analytics showed that 1% of the visitors didnt have flash. When the main goal of your website is getting people in, and getting them to spend money, management will have programmers bending over backwards to support even IE 5.0 if they think they will make an extra buck.

    Granted, the only reason the navigation on that site was simple, and flash was only used to make things flashy...

  • Resolution (Score:4, Interesting)

    by sonicmerlin (1505111) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @11:09AM (#31671092)

    I'm impressed by its resolution, which is purported to be 960 x 640, according to engadget: http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/29/wsj-apple-developing-new-iphone-plus-another-for-verizon/ [engadget.com]

    That's a step-up from the rest of the pack, including the "super-phone" EVO 4G. I'm wondering if this also means a step-up in overall screen size.

    Regardless of where you fall in the iPhone fan/hate camp, you have to admit competition breeds excellence.

    Now if only we could do something about the locked-in phones, 2 year contracts, "subsidized" loan plans, and uncompetitive wireless market in the US.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @11:23AM (#31671368)

    When people talk about smart phones, they throw around a lot of terms. A4 is here. The 3GS and the Nokia N900 have an A8. I've heard people say a lot about Snapdragon from Qualcomm.

    Does anybody have a table of how these perform against each other? All I've seen is clock frequencies being posted, which might be a poor measurement.

  • Flash on Linux (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Enderandrew (866215) <enderandrew@gmaUMLAUTil.com minus punct> on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @11:27AM (#31671482) Homepage Journal

    I always hear that Linux gets the short-end of the Flash stick.

    Flash is buggy and unstable on all platforms. Since I run nightly builds of Firefox on Windows with out-of-process plugins, I haven't had one single Firefox crash. However, I've seen Flash crash left and right. Apple's crash reports show Flash is the number one cause of application crashes on their platform.

    Linux support used to be terrible. The Linux player was way behind, and Adobe didn't seem to care to update it.

    Today Linux is the only platform you can get an official 64-bit version of Flash. One can argue that Adobe has treated Linux better than the other platforms by giving them a 64-bit Flash before anyone else.

  • Re:Hopefully Not (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Abcd1234 (188840) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @12:57PM (#31673306) Homepage

    Apples desire to kill anything that isn't theirs

    If, by "theirs", you mean an open, industry-supported standard, yeah... it's exactly like Microsoft. ::rollseyes::

    At the end of the day CUSTOMERS want Flash and Java on their phones but Apple is being a prick about it and not allowing it. Good competition will cause them to change their minds about this.

    Yup, you're absolutely correct! 'course, the customers knew full well that Apple had the platform locked down, but they bought the new shiny, anyway.

    So, let me ask you, who's really to blame, here?

    As an aside, I need to reiterate, I actually don't give a shit about what Apple does with the platform. None at all. What I care about is an open web. And if Apple bending over their customers and giving it to them hard does that, hey, I say pound away, Apple. Pound away.

  • Re:Hopefully Not (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Ryvar (122400) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @02:07PM (#31674544) Homepage

    iPhone battery life is, I've found, *entirely* dependent upon your location.

    Placing an average of 10 5-15 minute calls a day, my iPhone 3G which is coming up on 2 years old lasts 2.5-3 days in the Boston metro area.

    Back when it was 6 months old, placing 5 15-20 minute calls in the heart of San Francisco plus a little Google maps had the battery go from a full charge to completely drained in 6 hours. Similar results in the 7-8 hour range occurred on my next two visits.

    Contrast to the Sprint Mogul, which consistently had a 36-hour battery life no matter where I was.

    Presumably number of towers, number of competing phones, ambient radio noise and building/terrain geometry, etc. are the primary factors. Either way, my point is that this is a very relative thing: the iPhone is simultaneously the best and worst smartphone I've ever had in terms of battery life, depending on which city I'm in.

    --Ryv

  • by Aqualung812 (959532) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @03:45PM (#31676028)
    I want the ability to play streaming music and use the GPS at the same time. Think about where I want to use that: In my car, with its own portable power plant. I, like most people with a longer commute, have a power adapter for my car. Battery life doesn't matter when you're plugged in. In fact, if Apple just enabled 3rd party multitasking only when plugged in I'd be thrilled.

After an instrument has been assembled, extra components will be found on the bench.

Working...