Next iPhone — Front-Facing Camera, A4 Processor

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."

Comments

And this is different from the 10000 other rumors

[fulgan]

...because ?

Not so HD ?

[Saint Gerbil]

How HD can you get on an iPhone ?

Re:Not so HD ?

[Jack Zombie]

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

Re:Not so HD ?

[Sandbags]

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.

Re:Not so HD ?

[Graham J - XVI]

According to TFA, 960x640.

Re:Not so HD ?

[sopssa]

And do you seriously think iPhone has the CPU capability to crunch 1080p H.264 video?

Re:Not so HD ?

[Nadaka]

The cpu is irrelevant. The hardware video decoder is what matters. A lot of the arm cortex A8 devices can output 720p at reasonable framerates if the video is in the right format.

Re:Not so HD ?

[jimicus]

Considering your average camera phone lens can barely resolve a barcode, I'm not quite sure what the point of HD shooting would be.

Re:Not so HD ?

[BarryJacobsen]

Considering your average camera phone lens can barely resolve a barcode, I'm not quite sure what the point of HD shooting would be.

HD Barcodes?

Re:Not so HD ?

[dingen]

Yeah, which is actually 4x times the current resolution of 480 x 320, instead of 2x like mentioned in the summary.

Re:Not so HD ?

[jschen]

And what for? A 960x640 screen at that size would have an absurdly high pixel density, adding a lot to cost for no good reason. The iPhone screen resolution is already 163 dpi (per Apple's specs)! I think it's safe to say that we will never see a 960x460 screen on a consumer product the size of modern day cell phones. There's simply no point.

Re:Not so HD ?

[SiChemist]

The Droid's screen (854x480) is significantly clearer than my friend's iPhone screen. Small text becomes readable without zooming the browser. Higher resolution video (480p) on YouTube looks amazing.

I'm not sure that 960x640 would be significantly better (there are diminishing returns for a screen that small), but there is definitely a use case for higher resolution screens than the iPhone's current one.

Re:Not so HD ?

[Grizzley9]

Perhaps for mirroring video out? I have a JB phone and video out cables and the look of the screen blown up to projector size just isn't very clear or pretty. Having more resolution for presentations and teaching and whatnot would be welcomed. Apple could make inroads into numerous organizations, including schools, if their presentation package was beefed up some with dedicated ppt type programs and a more robust video out.

Re:Not so HD ?

[Achromatic1978]

That's a whole lot of weasel words in your statement there, pal:

A lot of the arm cortex A8 devices can output 720p at reasonable framerates if the video is in the right format .

Not very "It just works", really...

Re:Not so HD ?

[Nadaka]

Ok. And? TI 3530 capable of 720p@30fps in h.264 and mpeg4. The more powerful generation currently coming out may be able to handle full HD, but only time will tell.

Re:Not so HD ?

[kimvette]

What are you talking about? I mean, all you need to do is re-index the AVI container your PVR recorded the show at, use your NLE suite to cut out the advertisements, then run a simple ffmpeg command with about 12 different arguments, and voila! It just works(TM)! ;)

Re:Not so HD ?

[sznupi]

Actually, 720p instead of "SD" (say, 640x480) can make adequatly enough sense.

720p is 1280x720. Presently, well implemented cellphone camera can certainly make a difference between a photo shot at 640x480 and one at 1280x720; so why not video? (even 1080i/p should be fine, considering it's 1920x1080, or just 2 megapixels, and that practical limit to cellphone lenses & sensors is probably around 3MP)

Re:Not so HD ?

[jimicus]

and that practical limit to cellphone lenses & sensors is probably around 3MP)

Practical limit assuming they start to fit half-decent lenses and don't go for megapixels over image quality. On their own, megapixels mean damn-all. A tiny 3MP sensor (which is what you'll find in a cellphone) will record a significantly noisier image than 1MP sensor of the same size. Furthermore, the grubby cheap & nasty couple of element plastic lenses in a phone will never touch even a fairly basic compact camera.

Frankly, my first digital camera (which was all of 2MP, IIRC) was able to produce much better images than any cellphone I've seen.

Re:Not so HD ?

[sznupi]

Hey, I also carry a P&S digicam with me practically all the time (DSLR is too unwieldy); and not that bad one, even if it's almost from the bottom of price barrel (Fuji A800; for some reason it got practically the same sensor and lens as F40fd) and you have to fight chromatic aberration.

But I think you're too hard on mobile phone cameras. They can do 720p/1MP well enough so it makes sense to use that res instead of SD/0.3MP.

Re:Not so HD ?

[ChunderDownunder]

Like Samsung and Sony Ericsson already have on the market.

Re:Not so HD ?

[Sandbags]

Yes, the GPU in the A4 processor is fully capable of 1080p H.264. this is a documented feature of the GPU.

Flash? Unlocked?

[BVis]

But will it include minor expectations like a choice in carriers, or a bloody Flash plugin? Fix those before you add gadgets.

Still waiting

[actionbastard]

For the iPhone 3GAss.

Remarkable, though...

[vikingpower]

.... how Apple always manages to thrive upon rumors instead of upon "classical" ads. You may call such rumors "hypes", and they prolly are. Still, they do constitute remarkable publicity feats.

Re:Remarkable, though...

[AnotherShep]

But they *do* have classical ads. My in-laws won't stop talking about them. (Yes, I have one, but please. I don't want to talk about commercials.)

Re:Remarkable, though...

[Ukab the Great]

Ads cost millions of dollars. Rumors cost nothing.

Re:Remarkable, though...

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't believe Apple does any real product development. They just pick the best rumors and merge them into their existing product line.

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[BarryJacobsen]

And this is different from the 10000 other rumors...because ?

Cause it's rumors that are occurring less than a week before the iPad - DUH!

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry, the other 10000 rumors will all get their own Slashdot articles too.

More speculating?

[Bicx]

Is Apple product speculation really that interesting to people? Maybe it's fun to have that initial thought on what emerging tech could be, but Apple speculation quickly escalates into a never-ending stream of annoyance that builds expectations up to an unachievable level.

Re:More speculating?

[jo_ham]

You don't understand - this is slashdot. The rules work like this:

1. Dredge up some random rumour site from the depths of the internet with possible Apple product info. This is usually wild speculation and based on the Mountain-Dew-fueled ramblings of an Apple fan.

2. Bash this "finished product" on slashdot because it doesn't do x, y or z, or because it doesn't run Linux and use totally patent free technology.

3. Complain that Apple is getting free publicity and that they are mentioned too much.

4. Bring up comparisons to Apple in totally unrelated stories. Go to step 3 several times.

5. Apple announces product.

6. Complain that product is nothing like the rumour sites *guaranteed* it would be.

7. Complain that it's locked down (again) and that anyone who buys one for any reason is a clueless sheep.

8. Claim that the product is "proof" that Apple will soon fall.

9. Wait for netcraft to confirm it.

10. Assuming non-confirmation after two quarters of continued profitability for Apple, and large sales numbers of the "doomed" product, go to step 1.

Re:More speculating?

[Anonymous Coward]

That's a fantastic set of straw man arguments, you clearly understand how to get an "insightful" moderation on slashdot very well. Congratulations.

Re:More speculating?

[ColdWetDog]

Sort of like this?

Re:Front facing camera?

[WrongSizeGlass]

Exactly. A front facing camera on any cellphone is simply redonculous.

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[trurl7]

+5 Painfully True

Multi-tasking : do not want

[Anonymous Coward]

Multi-tasking is a bad idea. Most users are not computer professionals.

Re:Multi-tasking : do not want

[sopssa]

Multi-tasking is a bad idea. Most users are not computer professionals.

Yeah, because multi-tasking in Windows definitely requires you to be computer professional. Everyone I know, also girls, are also perfectly capable of multitasking on phone.

Re:Multi-tasking : do not want

[pushing-robot]

Ever use a Windows Mobile device? Background tasks on mobile hardware should be avoided whenever possible. Not because it's hard to multi-task, mind you—it's just hard to enjoy a smartphone when you have to constantly hunt for random process that are killing your battery life and/or slowing your phone to a crawl.

Re:Multi-tasking : do not want

[delinear]

Well then they should fix that in the UI - that's meant to be their speciality after all. It can't be that difficult to find some way to alert people when multiple programs might be slowing down the system and give the option to easily locate and close some of them?

Re:Multi-tasking : do not want

[confused one]

also girls

???

You're supposed to be paying attention to your teacher young man...

Re:Multi-tasking : do not want

[dotgain]

^ This ^. What looks to any reasonable person to be a close button (It's got a big "X") is actually called "Smart Minimize". Like most features that start with the word "Smart", it's entirely stupid. The process simply goes into the background, and you need to use the "Task Manager" (Yes, a Windows Mobile has and needs one) to kill them. Maybe it's because they're using memory. Maybe it's because they're using (expensive) data. Maybe it's because they've still got a file open, which is preventing you from moving / deleting it.

It took me ages to figure this one out, by the way. I was sorting through my, uhm, "media", trying to delete the crap. I could never delete the last file I looked at in media player ("Access Denied" was the error, not a more clueful "File locked" or "open by another process"), I had to either open a different file briefly and then delete, or kill the media player entirely. Or memorize the list of files I want to delete, open a temporary file, and delete said list.

Yep, it's just like life on a Windows PC, except with Display Size, RAM, and clock speed all scaled down proportionally, and stupidity kept more or less constant.

Often, it was less work on my part to simply power-cycle the phone, since removing and replacing the battery was by far the easiest and fastest task to do, and then do something else while it booted again.

Yes, the Apple approach is restrictive, and they've flagrantly given themselves a big advantage over 3rd Party Devs, but I can't say I blame them given that it "Is Actually a Phone After All" and don't want to get sued when someone can't call E911 because his IRC server has gone into an infinite loop (right about the same time his Postgresql backups usually kick off, too).

Re:Multi-tasking : do not want

[TheNumberless]

Well then they should fix that in the UI - that's meant to be their speciality after all.

UI is their speciality in part because they avoid doing something until they figure out how to do it right. See copy/paste on the iPhone.

It can't be that difficult to find some way to alert people when multiple programs might be slowing down the system and give the option to easily locate and close some of them?

You're asking them to make a phone that occasionally interrupts what you're doing to ask for input on what it can do to keep working properly. I don't know that you'll ever get a UI out of that approach that isn't abjectly terrible.

My guess is that multitasking for third party apps will come, but only when it doesn't come with a non-trivial decrease in either performance or usability. It's not as easy a problem as you make it out to be.

Re:Multi-tasking : do not want

[dunkelfalke]

Ever use a Windows Mobile device?

Yes. And multitasking is the reason why I've stayed with Windows Mobile for 6 years. It neither slows down the phone nor it is killing the battery significantly faster. I cannot enjoy my smartphone if I am not able to multitask.
Hell, even my 10 year old Franklin Ebookman with its AFAIR 16 mhz CPU handled multitasking just fine and was because of it (and because of its screen) much better than a Palm III.

Re:Multi-tasking : do not want

[Locke2005]

What -- you have absolutely no desire to play Space Invaders on your phone while you're talking to someone? Even if it's someone really boring, like your mom?

Re:Multi-tasking : do not want

[dfghjk]

That's why Apple doesn't support it in OS X, right?

Re:Multi-tasking : do not want

[dfghjk]

I had plenty of problems with Windows Mobile. That wasn't one of them, unless by "constantly" you mean once or twice a month.

I also used a number of other smartphones with multitasking. The problems that the Apple faithful claim are intractable with multitasking never effected me. It's just another fraud perpetuated by Apple. What did they say about 3rd party apps on an iPhone when it was first introduced? What do they say now? Nothing but BS.

Re:Multi-tasking : do not want

[dfghjk]

"Always felt awkward to close apps only to discover that they were not really closed."

Just like OS X!

"Most people don't need mult-tasking on a phone, and most people will be annoyed by the implementation unless it is super transparent and simple."

Most people who use an iPhone would be pissed if it didn't offer multitasking. The iPhone multitasks, just not for YOUR apps. Apple's apps can get it when they want it, and people definitely want it.

Re:Multi-tasking : do not want

[Overzeetop]

I guess HTC has it right. Press the X to minimize, press and hold to close the app. It only takes me two taps to see the running program list and switch back and forth between them. Sure, every once in a while I accidentally leave something major running, but it's a small price to pay for being able to switch between apps instead of having to shut one down to get data from another.

WinMobile has its shortcomings, but multitasking is not really one of them.

Hopefully Not

[RobotRunAmok]

The iPhone's refusal to adopt Flash, coupled with its huge popularity, is among the greatest forces driving development away from Flash and towards alternate platforms. This is a good thing.

Re:Hopefully Not

[MobyDisk]

This is a good thing.

Since you've been modded to "Interesting" I think it is fair to ask "Why?"

Re:Hopefully Not

[dintech]

I wish they could do something about the battery life though.

Re:Hopefully Not

[DJRumpy]

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

[Abcd1234]

The general view is that flash is a relatively closed format (yeah, it's an open spec, but let's face it, no one else has a player comparable to Adobe's implementation), based on a patented codec, wrapped up with a rather annoying DRM layer.

Personally, my view is that flash is simply annoying... it's slow, clunky, sucks up CPU time, interacts poorly with the mouse and keyboard, is only barely cross-platform (let's face it, Linux gets the short end of the Flash stick) and is generally less elegant than an integrated browser solution. Well, at least for video (I never play flash games, so if it sticks around in that niche, hey, so be it).

Re:Hopefully Not

[am 2k]

For developing in Flash, you need a specific app that costs $700 and only runs on Windows and Mac OS X. For developing in HTML5/Javascript, you need a text editor and a web browser.

Re:Hopefully Not

[cynyr]

to bad i like hulu, pandora, last.fm, bbc's iPlayer, the ocasional crappy flash game. Now i know things like the games, and iplayer should be easy to port to html5+JS+svg, things like hulu are less likely, as that layer of DRM is required for them to exist. So while i hate flash as much of the next guy, it's here, and to use parts of the web i like, i need it on my MID.

Re:Hopefully Not

[diskofish]

Wrong. Why do people here always pull shit out of their asses? You can download the Flex SDK and compiler for free from Adobe, and if you like, you can buy the IDE from Adobe for about $250.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Abcd1234]

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

[Vectormatic]

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:Hopefully Not

[sopssa]

And even more so, theres also freeware Flash IDE's. Sure they're not as good as Adobe's, but it's still better than what easy IDE's there are for HTML5 Canvas (0 to be exact)

Re:Hopefully Not

[Abcd1234]

For developing in Flash, you need a specific app that costs $700 and only runs on Windows and Mac OS X. For developing in HTML5/Javascript, you need a text editor and a web browser.

And a few stress balls, and eventually a toupee after you're done tearing all your hair out...

Re:Hopefully Not

[jo_ham]

iPlayer already works on the iPhone - they specifically added H.264 streams to support it - just one of the developments away from Flash that people are looking for.

Re:Hopefully Not

[delinear]

If it's all about security, I wonder why they don't ban flash on safari for desktops? I assumed it was because flash is a major resource hog and it chokes the processors in phones.

Re:Hopefully Not

[delinear]

I wish they could do something about the battery life though.

They are, a faster processor, higher resolution and second camera should do something about battery life. Of course, it won't be something positive, but you can't have everything :)

Re:Hopefully Not

[patch0]

I can view the iPlayer just fine on my iphone over wifi.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Anonymous Coward]

Improving on Flash? Good.

Steve Jobs dictating how to run the internet? I'm not so thrilled.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Vectormatic]

well, my comment wasnt a reason for apple to ban it from the iphone, but a reason why less flash on the web would be a good thing. i'm pretty sure Apple could secure a flash plugin running on their own iphone OS.

Flash going away would mean one less attack vector for the botnet-builders to exploit.

As for Safari, safari has a slightly better security model then windows (XP), so AFAIK the flash plugin would not be running with root permissions, as it would be on most windows machines

Re:Hopefully Not

[lwsimon]

Pandora has an iPhone app. last.fm has an iPhone app. iPlayer works via h.264.

Of the things you mention only Hulu isn't currently working natively on iPhone.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Eunuchswear]

I assumed it was because flash is a major resource hog and it chokes the processors in phones.

Doesn't choke the processor in my phone.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Skuld-Chan]

So its ok that Apple close everything down and make it so that you have to have a signed app (drm) to run anything on their phone, but not ok that flash is a closed format?

Also you say "a patented codec" you know Flash supports about 6 different video codecs and 6 different audio formats right?

On CPU time - the only reason it sucks cpu time on the Mac is because Apple doesn't publically document hardware acceleration for video players - essentially to do video on the Mac you have to use their slow Quicktime libs. In fact the only apps that use these secret api's are made by Apple (remember how Microsoft got a lot of flak over them being the only ones using secret tools/api's on Office to give them a competitive edge?). On my windows machine app - run of the mill Flash apps never seem to approach 10% cpu overhead in a worse case scenario. I have a 933 MHz Celeron based umpc that runs Windows XP and plays all flash apps (including hulu) just fine.

The one study that was done on the Nexus One showed that playing video on Flash 10 used about 6% of the battery resources overall.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Abcd1234]

So its ok that Apple close everything down and make it so that you have to have a signed app (drm) to run anything on their phone, but not ok that flash is a closed format?

Do you like erecting strawmen? Does it make you feel manly when you knock them down?

Re:Hopefully Not

[MBGMorden]

It's a chicken and the egg problem. I have an iPod Touch - I occasionally use it, but not really for video. My main OS at home though is Ubuntu 9.10 64-bit, using the Chromium browser. Flash support is dodgy. It kinda sorta works. Sometimes. I can USUALLY rely on a video to kick off, but controls often don't work so I can't pause, or change res, go full screen, etc.

All in all, while I'd like to see it work everywhere, Flash really has become annoying to see on web pages. I don't agree with Apple purposing keeping it off these devices, but then again, I honestly don't see developers switching to something more open than Flash as a bad thing either.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Abcd1234]

So its ok that Apple close everything down and make it so that you have to have a signed app (drm) to run anything on their phone, but not ok that flash is a closed format?

Aww, apparently my other comment offended a moderator. Presumably they don't know what strawmen are. Here, let me explain: I never made any value judgment regarding the iPhone, you just made that part up. That's the strawman.

In fact, I couldn't care less how open or closed their platform is (and, TBH, if people really cared, they'd vote with their wallets, which they don't, so not only do I not care about the platform, I care even less about users bitching about it). What I care about is an open web based on open standards, and a browsing experience that isn't hampered by annoying plugins. If Apple maintaining a chokehold over the iPhone achieves that, hey, works for me, I'm not one of those fools who bought an iPhone and then was surprised to discover the platform was locked up nice and tight.

Also you say "a patented codec" you know Flash supports about 6 different video codecs and 6 different audio formats right?

Oh come on. Let's get real, here. 99% of Flash videos out there are based on H.264. Can I pack, say, Theora into a Flash container and have it play on my browser? No, of course not, because Adobe defines the defacto standard implementation, and so 99% of people would never be able to watch it.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Skuld-Chan]

Do you like erecting strawmen? Does it make you feel manly when you knock them down?

I'm hardly misrepresenting your position - you don't like Flash because its closed - I'm actually not disagreeing with that position. I think its hypocritical of you to not like Flash because its closed, but support Apple's development decisions - because they are essentially the same as Flash.

The rest of my argument just refutes what you state as fact. I simply showing that you are in fact misinformed about Flash in general - not really a strawman either.

Anything else I missed?

Re:Hopefully Not

[Abcd1234]

I think its hypocritical of you to not like Flash because its closed, but support Apple's development decisions

Why? If the iPhone remains closed for eternity, that will have absolutely no effect on me. My concern is for an open web. That's it. If Apple wants to lock up their platform like a drum, hey, that's their business.

Re:Hopefully Not

[FatherOfONe]

Hey, I have an idea, how about "if" Adobe wanted to go ahead and create FLASH for the Iphone and give it away? Wait they are not allowed to do that. How about if Oracle wanted to develop Java for the iPhone and also give it way? Nope they can't either. There isn't any good technical reason, but just a political one like you mentioned. Apples desire to kill anything that isn't theirs (Sounds like Microsoft to me).

So for those developers of Flash and Java (client side), you have a choice, learn Objective C or move to a different platform. Yes some developers are creating iPhone apps, but others are migrating over to other platforms (Google). Also, yes I know about the cross compilers, but that is an unfortunate workaround.

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.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Abcd1234]

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

[DJRumpy]

No one said anything about increasing pixel density. I'm said it was sufficient, meaning the display resolution is adequate for the display size. Just throwing a higher resolution display on it for the sake of some sales point, without at least maintaining the same pixel density is a waste of time.

Most computers have common PPI numbers in the 100-130 range. The iPhone currently has 161 or thereabouts. Cramming higher resolutions into such a tiny display is wasted effort IMO if you can't see the difference. The human eye loses the ability to see any gaps at fairly low PPI.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Ant P.]

IIRC, Flash is "open" in the sense that Microsoft's OOXML is "open". Or at least that was the reason I've seen for why gnash/swfdec are so far behind the curve.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Ephemeriis]

This is a good thing.

Since you've been modded to "Interesting" I think it is fair to ask "Why?"

Flash has its place. It's really hard to make interactive web-based games without it. And HTML5 isn't going to do anything about that. But Flash has been overused for years.

Flash is used frequently for simple video playback... Which HTML5 will hopefully lessen.

Flash is also frequently used where some DHTML and ajax-y stuff would be more than sufficient... Sites will use Flash for their menu system, or random buttons, or slightly-animated graphics. I use no-script, which means Flash is disabled by default. I'm always amazed when I stumble across a site that displays nothing but a request to install Flash... And when I activate Flash, it doesn't look any different than any other non-Flash page out there.

Flash is buggy in general. Folks complain specifically about the Linux builds... But it's buggy everywhere else. I have frequent Flash crashes on my Windows box. I see people complaining about it on their Macs as well.

If we can eliminate a horribly buggy plug-in like Flash from most of the web pages out there, that's definitely a plus in my book.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Ryvar]

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

Re:Hopefully Not

[Steve Max]

You use your computer display at a distance of ~50cm, while your phone is at ~10cm. This means that, if the pixel density was equal, a pixel from the monitor would look ~5x smaller than a pixel from the phone.

In other words, as you get closer to something, you can see smaller and smaller details. You can't see well 0.1mm structures at ~50cm, but you can see even smaller detail than that at ~10cm; and 0.1mm structures are what you would get from a 254 ppi display. You eyes don't care about the size of a structure; they care about the angular size they cover, and that angular size gets bigger as you get closer to it.

Re:Hopefully Not

[BitZtream]

So its ok that Apple close everything down and make it so that you have to have a signed app (drm) to run anything on their phone, but not ok that flash is a closed format?

First off, a digital signature isn't DRM, get a clue.

Second, yes it is acceptable for Apple and not Adobe. People like the iPhone, no one likes Flash, though a few people do like a few very specific Flash based things. Take video off the web and the only place you'll see flash used is in places where you clearly don't want to use it. Scammers (which facebook qualifies as) and annoying ads.

You can get by with doing things people don't like if you do enough things they do like. Apple is good at walking that line.

Re:Hopefully Not

[acoustix]

I think its hypocritical of you to not like Flash because its closed, but support Apple's development decisions

Why? If the iPhone remains closed for eternity, that will have absolutely no effect on me. My concern is for an open web. That's it. If Apple wants to lock up their platform like a drum, hey, that's their business.

Couldn't the same be said of Flash as well? If Adobe wants to lock up their platform like a drum, hey, that's their business.

Nobody is forcing you to use flash and nobody is forced to use Apple.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Cederic]

As someone that owns a higher resolution multi-tasking phone that supports Flash (and has a better battery life than my colleagues' iPhones) I'm highly amused by your dismissal of such features.

Incidentally, I will grant that streaming Internet radio over 3G and using the FM transmitter to play it on your car's sound system while using the built-in Sat Nav is hard on battery life, and I appreciate that as an iPhone user you haven't had that problem.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Abcd1234]

Why? If the iPhone remains closed for eternity, that will have absolutely no effect on me. My concern is for an open web. That's it. If Apple wants to lock up their platform like a drum, hey, that's their business.

Couldn't the same be said of Flash as well?

Of course the same could be said of Flash. Of course, I never called for Adobe to open the Flash standard up, just as I never called for Apple to open their platform up. Where did you get the impression I did?

What I said was that I'd be very happy to see Flash go away, and if Apple manages to make that happen, I will happily cheer them on, as the end result is a benefit for me and for the open web in general.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Steve Max]

Shame on me for exaggerating. The point is that you use your phone closer to your eyes than your monitor. That is why the resolution difference between an iPhone and a N900/Droid/Nexus One/HD2/etc is so clear.

Re:Hopefully Not

[dfghjk]

"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."

That's the Apple line anyway. I see you bought it and are regurgitating it.

Flash works fine on a touch phone, just not on one made like Apple's. Apple broke the browsing metaphor that had existed on every platform up until the iPhone. That's what broke flash, not the fact that it's a phone. Apple is responsible for this, they are not the victim.

That said, I'm fine with getting a non-flash version of reality in the future, I'm just annoyed that Apple claims it offers a first class browsing experience when in reality it is more incompatible than those that came before it (and that choice was deliberate).

Re:Hopefully Not

[MobyDisk]

based on a patented codec, wrapped up with a rather annoying DRM layer.

Flash != Flash video.

I agree with you, for Flash video. But for applications, or animated vectorized games, Flash is the best option. Until that changes (maybe it will with HTML5, but I doubt it), Flash has a place on the web.

Re:Hopefully Not

[MobyDisk]

But you are the one who said that Flash is bad because it is closed, but simultaneously said it was okay for Apple to do the same thing. You erected the strawman, he just pointed it out.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Skuld-Chan]

First off, a digital signature isn't DRM, get a clue.

So DRM locks my media to my device...

Code signing makes it so I can only run approved apps on my device.

Whats the difference? Both technologies lock me out of watching or running what I want on my device.

Re:Hopefully Not

[mdwh2]

The iPhone's refusal to adopt Flash, coupled with its huge popularity

*heh* Yes, I'm sure that 5% of the phone market[*], let alone the comparison to people using netbooks, laptops and desktops, is really responsible for the change.

But assuming you're right for a moment, can I also make a request that the next Iphone:

* Refuses to load any web page that isn't 100% correctly written.
* Only runs open source programs.
* Stops supporting native programs, which just further fragments the market, when cross-platform support would be much preferred.

All that is surely a good thing - we get the changes made, whilst my phone doesn't lose any features in the meantime, as I'm not an Apple phone user.

[*] Before anyone replies, or mods me down for stating the facts, have the decency to look up the basic market figures.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Abcd1234]

But you are the one who said that Flash is bad because it is closed, but simultaneously said it was okay for Apple to do the same thing.

Well, no, I didn't quite say that, but hey, let's pretend I did for a moment...

You erected the strawman, he just pointed it out.

No, I didn't.

Or do you not see how an open web and a closed cell phone are, in fact, different things, and that I might care about one but not give a shit about the other?

Re:Hopefully Not

[exomondo]

As someone that owns a higher resolution multi-tasking phone that supports Flash (and has a better battery life than my colleagues' iPhones) I'm highly amused by your dismissal of such features.

I agree that it should have flash...i mean it really is a defacto standard, like it or not. But i also see GPs point about flash not working on touchscreen phones, though only with regard to functionality that uses 'mouseover' events...other than that i don't see any issue with it.

Re:Hopefully Not

[exomondo]

[citation needed]

Any actual unbiased reviews to back that up? I would have been impressed if they used the same battery capacity and the droid was better. It does have a bigger battery, so I would expect it to have a bigger capacity.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/10/30/motorola-droid-review/

Forgive me for not seeing any place that he mentioned the Motorola Droid, are you seeing something im not?

I would suspect it is also likely to be the N900...which IMO is freakin awesome phone, probably going to be my next choice.

Re:Hopefully Not

[CaptainZapp]

First off, a digital signature isn't DRM, get a clue.

Bub, you shouldn't spout bullshit on a public forum when it's you, who doesn't have a clue.

I suggest you push your fanboiism aside and actually look up what DRM is and how it's (usually) implemented.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Cederic]

Sadly the MP3s on my n900 don't contain live coverage of the cricket.

Re:Hopefully Not

[MobyDisk]

Well, no, I didn't quite say that, but hey, let's pretend I did for a moment...

You are right. It was RobotRunAmok's statement, not yours. I apologize.

Or do you not see how an open web and a closed cell phone are, in fact, different things, and that I might care about one but not give a shit about the other?

Yes, they are different things. I just think that promoting closed devices that intentionally buck standards (even defacto ones, that aren't as open as some may like) is a bad idea - even if one doesn't like that particular standard.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Abcd1234]

I just think that promoting closed devices that intentionally buck standards (even defacto ones, that aren't as open as some may like) is a bad idea

Yeah, but we're talking about bucking a pseudo-open, defacto standard in lieu of a fully open, industry standard. Sounds like a positive thing to me.

Re:Hopefully Not

[Xyde]

Apple doesn't publically document hardware acceleration for video players - essentially to do video on the Mac you have to use their slow Quicktime libs. In fact the only apps that use these secret api's are made by Apple

Please stop repeating this lie. Adobe is being disingenuous and intentionally misleading. It doesn't even make sense - the "slow Quicktime libs" you are talking about are in fact hardware accelerated and if Adobe bothered to use them instead of their own ancient Rube Goldberg routines they would have HW acceleration for free. And even if it were true that HW acceleration was completely prohibited somehow, it should not take entire cores of a CPU to repaint a screen region 30 times a second.

Re:Flash? Unlocked?

[qoncept]

http://gear.ign.com/articles/106/1065534p1.html

I don't think Apple devices will ever support flash.

Re:Front facing camera?

[TheKidWho]

Exactly, god forbid someone wants to use Skype for video conferencing!

Re:Flash? Unlocked?

[rsmith-mac]

or a bloody Flash plugin

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

Re:Front facing camera?

[pushing-robot]

I don't think they'd remove the other camera.

Oh, and editors: If I wanted idle speculation on the next Apple product, I'd go to MacRumors or any of a dozen other sites. Can we focus a bit more on stuff that... matters?

Recurring lesson about Apple

[dazedNconfuzed]

If there's one thing history teaches about rumors regarding upcoming Apple products, it's that nobody talking knows anything. If anyone gets any Apple-product prediction right it's because enough monkeys pounding on typewriters will eventually write Shakespeare.

Remember how the iPad was supposed to have a front-facing camera, an awesome chess game, full 1080p HD video, solar charging, biometric security, etc. - and wasn't going to just be a fat iPod Touch? Yeah.

Sure the next iPhone will be an improvement. Duh. Anything more than that is pure rampant rabid speculation.

Re:Recurring lesson about Apple

[Altus]

Some of the rumors might be informed, its not like apple is perfect at stopping leaks.

good luck figuring out which ones are real leaks and which are just speculation though.

Re:Recurring lesson about Apple

[alobar72]

totally agree - I am still bored because of the many "prediction" regarding the iPad.
I really dont want to start this all over with the next iPhone - flodding every techforum there is.
I am not that into hardware-"facts" anyway - since the magic will be in the software - or nowhere.

Re:Recurring lesson about Apple

[Yvan256]

If anyone gets any Apple-product prediction right it's because enough monkeys pounding on typewriters will eventually write Shakespeare.

If someone could finally give the monkeys modern computers with word processors, the error and typo rate would go down and they could write Shakespeare a lot faster.

Re:Recurring lesson about Apple

[L4t3r4lu5]

Sure the next iPhone will be an improvement.

It will run Android.

Zzzzzzing!

Re:Recurring lesson about Apple

[UnknowingFool]

Depends on the source of the rumor. Some sites got the iPad right when they predicted a large iPod Touch with 3G capabilities. But generally the rule is to wait til Apple makes an announcement.

Re:Recurring lesson about Apple

[delinear]

As long as those computers aren't hooked up to the internet, otherwise they'll waste all their time looking for monkey pr0n.

Re:Recurring lesson about Apple

[delinear]

Depends on the source of the rumor. Some sites got the iPad right when they predicted a large iPod Touch with 3G capabilities. But generally the rule is to wait til Apple makes an announcement.

Well in that case the source of the rumour doesn't really matter, since we have no way of verifying it before the fact. The fact that so many rumours are circulating means a ton of sites will get it right, even though their sources were probably non-existent and they were just guessing. Hell, I guessed the iPad would be a big iPod Touch with 3G, I certainly don't have any insider sources.

Re:Recurring lesson about Apple

[Yvan256]

Or play that stupid "hit the monkey" banner...

"Hey look, it's that asshole Phil! If we hit him we can win a prize!"

Re:Recurring lesson about Apple

[Linker3000]

Give an infinte number of monkeys an infinite number of typewriters (or computers) and eventually you will have a large pile of mangled metal and plastic all covered in shit.

Re:Recurring lesson about Apple

[cshbell]

If there's one thing history teaches about rumors regarding upcoming Apple products, it's that nobody talking knows anything.

That's not always the case; sometimes, far from it. The source for this information comes from John Gruber over at Daring Fireball. It's well known, and John says as much, that he has sources inside Apple. As a reliable critic ('critic' as in Ebert, not hostility) of Apple, it seems his sources are either known to the company and the leaks are green-lighted, or else Apple simply doesn't care enough about smaller announcements to ferret out the mole. I'd bet heavily on the former.

John doesn't always make predictions of a declarative nature, but when he does, you can more or less take them as stated fact; for example, his "predictions" for last year's WWDC.

Re:Recurring lesson about Apple

[ClosedSource]

"because enough monkeys pounding on typewriters will eventually write Shakespeare."

Yes, but who wants to volunteer to be one of the monkeys who read through the results looking for Shakespeare's works?

Re:Recurring lesson about Apple

[Blakey Rat]

The extra z means extra zing!

http://www.yellow5.com/pokey/archive/index296.html

I so wish I'd bought stock

[Nursie]

Back just before the iPhone launch. Unfortunately my friend in 'the city' informed me that the analysts at his place didn't think it would take off and I didn't invest.

Dumbass!

I hope they were fired.

The way things are going the holy steve could wipe his butt on each iPad and still they'd sell like holy relics and the stock would rocket.

Re:I so wish I'd bought stock

[baka_toroi]

You only have yourself to blame for thinking those "analysts" have more of a clue than you or anybody else has.

Re:I so wish I'd bought stock

[sopssa]

Maybe not in every case, but if they're more right than wrong it works out.

A new, innovative product!

[Computer_kid]

I present to you, the iPad Nano!

Re:A new, innovative product!

[leuk_he]

But does it have magic?

Re:A new, innovative product!

[Vectormatic]

i bought an ipod touch the week after the big ipad let-down ($500 is ok, but what i want is a mac-book tablet, not a big ipod), and i seriously considered using apple's free engraving service to have 'iPad nano' engraved on it

didn't do it though, i just would have felt stupid anyway, with all those maxiPad jokes..

Re:A new, innovative product!

[PixetaledPikachu]

I present to you, the iPad Nano!

I want my iPod Mono

Re:A new, innovative product!

[intheshelter]

And now witness these amazing HUGE MIDGETS!!

Re:Front facing camera?

[Graham J - XVI]

The front facing camera would be in addition to the higher resolution camera at the rear. It would be used for video conferencing.

Source Article

[necro81]

Good Grief. I have a first-gen iPhone, and will consider upgrading when the next version comes out. So you can expect that I'm excited about the possible specs on. But, really, the linked article is a ridiculous i-gasm. If you are going to report this stuff, stick to the original sources, rather than linking to second-hand articles that lace their copy with unabashed fanboy-ism. If you want color commentary along with your tech news, check out the relevant post on Engadget.

What actually kicked off this latest wave of speculation was an an article from the Wall Street Journal, stating that Apple is developing a CDMA version of the iphone for Verizon. The WSJ is a fairly reputable source that wouldn't print unless they had some solid evidence, so this should be interpreted as a bit more than a typical rumor.

Re:Source Article

[Algan]

The WSJ is a fairly reputable source ...

The WSJ USED to be a fairly reputable source. Then Murdoch bought it.

Re:Flash? Unlocked?

[Ephemeriis]

But will it include minor expectations like a choice in carriers, or a bloody Flash plugin? Fix those before you add gadgets.

I've seen rumors that a Verizon iPhone is on the way...

But, as far as Flash goes, I'd rather they didn't support it.

Sure, Flash has its place... But it's been horribly abused and overused for years. Platforms like the iPhone, and the advent of HTML5, have the opportunity to push Flash back where it belongs. I'd love to see that happen.

Re:Front facing camera?

[soilheart]

Or use the video call function that was one of the most hyped new things when Sweden launched their 3G networks. Which naturally youngsters and deaf people just love (in no special order/grouping). God forbid.

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[Yvan256]

And then, 24 hours later, they will all get their dupe too. And then another 24 hours later half of those will get a second dupe because the posters don't even read Slashdot themselves.

front facing, rear facing

[roman_mir]

is there some reason why a camera cannot be flexible to face whatever direction the user wants?

A rotating camera inside a transparent sphere or maybe a system of mirrors and a software switch between directions?

Not that I care about an iphone or a camera on a mobile, it's just a strange 'improvement'.

Re:front facing, rear facing

[Marcika]

is there some reason why a camera cannot be flexible to face whatever direction the user wants?

Moving parts, hinges, even rotating mirrors, are failure-prone and take a lot of space. Most phone with front-facing cameras use two smaller lenses instead and leave out any moving parts -- my 4-year-old Sony Ericsson K610 has a VGA front camera for videoconferencing and a 2MP rear-facing camera for proper pictures. I am pretty sure that the iPhone will use the same concept.

Re:front facing, rear facing

[Nerdfest]

It's cheaper and easier to have a lower resolution front-facing camera as it removes the need for moving, easily breakable parts. Other camera have had this for about 3 years, the technology (and precedence) is well established. The question is are they going to allow Skype to be used over 3G?

Re:front facing, rear facing

[Lumpy]

Sony did that, it's horribly delicate.

Re:front facing, rear facing

[cynyr]

Moving parts, hinges, even rotating mirrors, are failure-prone and take a lot of space. Most phone with front-facing cameras use two smaller lenses instead and leave out any moving parts -- my 4-year-old Sony Ericsson K610 has a VGA front camera for videoconferencing and a 2MP rear-facing camera for proper pictures. I am pretty sure that the iPhone will use the same concept.

"proper pictures" with a 2MP cam, with a tiny tiny tiny sensor, with a shit lens, right.... I have found very little use for my camera on my phone, anything i want to take pictures of gets the SLR camera, and things like if the car gets hit, are better off on a disposable, as photos on film are much harder to manipulate. Any US carriers allow video conferencing on their networks? or do i need to pay $20 a month for that feature? Then again i like my phones phones, and my computers computers, and my cameras cameras, and an all in one device seems to do a shitty job at all of them. Just let me teather devices to my phone, and then i can have a small phone and a pda/tablet that just has internet.

Re:front facing, rear facing

[vlm]

is there some reason why a camera cannot be flexible to face whatever direction the user wants?

I had a camera flip phone in the mid 00s that mounted the cam on the "flip". So close the phone and the cam faces you, for self portraits, and open the phone and the cam faces outward, for taking pictures of other people. Camera "shutter" button on side, using "trigger finger".

I found the whole concept of a cam phone useless, and the blurry fuzzy low res pix to be worthless, but it was a good design.

Re:front facing, rear facing

[Linker3000]

"...user wants..."

Apple

See the problem there!?

Re:front facing, rear facing

[dotgain]

Get over it - cellphone cameras are fun. Nobody's pretending they're going to get print quality out of their cellphone camera.

Several years ago I proudly lugged an SLR (sometimes two) everywhere I went, but I've moved on from that. Cellphone cameras have enabled me to get a lot of really nice opportunity shots with at least enough quality for enjoyment, based mainly on comments and "Likes" on my Facebook page, where people see most of my shots in shameless low resolution.

Re:front facing, rear facing

[Marcika]

"proper pictures" with a 2MP cam, with a tiny tiny tiny sensor, with a shit lens, right.... I have found very little use for my camera on my phone, anything i want to take pictures of gets the SLR camera

Well, I don't have enough space in my pant pockets to lug around a DSLR or even an extra digicam or disposable. The more interesting question, though, is whether Apple will beef up the rear camera from "barely acceptable" to "decent" (i.e. with a xenon flash and a bigger lens). My guess is that they won't.

Any US carriers allow video conferencing on their networks? or do i need to pay $20 a month for that feature?

AFAIK, AT&T has enabled video calls 2-3 years ago, but it's something like 35 cents/minute or $10 for 60 minutes -- so you probably want to stick with Skype & co.

Re:Flash? Unlocked?

[Yvan256]

Flash needs to die, and Apple is pushing web standards as the alternative (as opposed to Microsoft who would also like to see Flash die but only to replace it with Silverlight).

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.

How will affect old stuff

[fermion]

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.

Re:How will affect old stuff

[konohitowa]

I'm still using my first gen iPhone (EDGE). Perhaps I'll update when the next one comes out, but so far the only compelling reason I've had is hardware voice recognition. Just because you're unhappy with the speed doesn't make it unusable for everyone. Plus, I like the savings of not having to pay AT&T's 3G surcharge.

Frankly, had I not wanted to update the OS I could have just refused the update, and I could always rollback if I changed my mind. But having to remember to click "No" might be asking too much of some people. Although, there may be some AT&T forced updates buried in their somewhere -- I somewhat lost track because I run developer beta's frequently.

Re:How will affect old stuff

[dangitman]

I had to replace my first gen iPhone because the 3.0 software, released only two years after the iPhone, ran like a dog.

So, why didn't you just run the version 2 software instead? Your reasoning isn't very sound, because there was no reason you had to have new hardware.

Re:Flash? Unlocked?

[teg]

But will it include minor expectations like a choice in carriers,

It does have a choice in carriers outside the US. The US is special, with much more carrier lock-in - a big reason being that the carriers use different standards. So I wouldn't be surprised if the ability to choose Verizon is far off - the mobile phone market just doesn't work as well in the US as elsewhere.

Screen resolution

[Xest]

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:Screen resolution

[Vectormatic]

i dont quite understand the need for higher resolution screens in these devices. I just spent ten seconds with my nose on my ipod touch, and i honestly cant say i would need a higher res screen on that thing, especially since you never ever have that thing three inches away from your eyes anyway.

i dont see the value in having twice the resolution (four times the pixels) if the screen still stays the same size. In the mean time more power will be needed to drive four times the amount of pixels on the screen..

Re:Screen resolution

[Grizzley9]

Video Out presentations where the screen is mirrored?

Re:Screen resolution

[rovolo]

Assuming that the screen is the same physical size, would there be any reason to resize the GUI for existing apps? Your fingers haven't changed size.

It's much harder to translate a GUI between different aspect ratios than to just up the resolution. If Apple increased the resolution on the built in widgets, then existing applications would look the same as they do on current hardware but sharper.

Honestly, what changes would you make to the layout if the resolution was higher? Even though we can put books onto microfiche, we still print them onto paper. An increased resolution can make it easier to distinguish between widgets, but with hardware as small as a phone no radical changes to the layout are really necessary. The only major problem for current apps will be custom icons and widgets that haven't been scaled up to the higher resolution.

The problem with different Android devices are the different aspect ratios like 3:4 or 3:5 and different physical screen sizes like 2.8", 3.2" and 3.7". The iPhone will most likely always be 2:3 and 3.5"

Re:Screen resolution

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

I'd be quite surprised if Apple changes the screen res of the iPhone this soon. The current screen res is good enough and that's not something that's going to change unless people start holding their phones closer to their faces. A higher res screen would have to offer enough of a benefit to overcome the extra production cost, increased GPU consumption, and extra mucking about for developers.

Re:Screen resolution

[Xest]

You don't need to change the layout, or update existing applications per-se, but it depends on whether developers want to take advantages of a higher resolution.

Games would look far better, existing UI's may be able to be modified so that they're not limited by the existing low resolution for high res users and so forth. At the end of the day, there's only so much you can fit on screen per resolution, and if a higher resolution allows you to build a better UI then you're going to want to do it.

Apple need to decide if they're going to let devs use the screen resolution, if they're not then a resolution update is pointless for the most part, and means the iPhone will begin to look dated as Android devices and so forth offer much better UIs and much better looking games for example. If they are going to allow devs to access it then what are their options? They can get devs to rewrite existing apps, which may not happen or they can allow devs to explicitly make use of the new resolution and scale those that don't make use of it.

Bringing in aspect ratios is silly, because that's the same argument that was used for screen resolutions, that was used for differing hardware features like GPS, different processor speeds and so forth but throughout the iPhone's development. It's like people are grasping at this idea that the iPhone offers and will always offer a fixed platform to develop, but it's stupid to think that, Apple can't keep up and expand their offerings if the hardware can't change so they ultimately have to. Anyone developing iPhone apps would be foolish not to realise this, and not to take it into account when developing regardless, the fact is, you just don't know what hardware changes you'll have to cater to in future anymore than you do with other platforms like desktop Linux, Windows, or even Android. It's going to bite eventually, it makes sense to cater to it from the off if you're developing an app that you intend to maintain and isn't just a throwaway quick cash in like fart button apps etc.

Re:Screen resolution

[rovolo]

I did not say that the iPhone hardware did not change, but that done correctly upping the screen resolution should be transparent for most current apps.

Games would look far better, existing UI's may be able to be modified so that they're not limited by the existing low resolution for high res users and so forth. At the end of the day, there's only so much you can fit on screen per resolution, and if a higher resolution allows you to build a better UI then you're going to want to do it.

Apps that are not games should require almost no modification. They are mostly comprised of built-in widgets which, if Apple did things right, would scale correctly to the higher resolution and not need to be modified. It is true that you can cram more stuff onto the display with a higher resolution, but you don't want to. The alleged resolution is almost the size of the original iMac, but you wouldn't want to cram a desktop UI onto a phone. I would hazard that the most important aspect of designing a UI is the physical size. Games probably would require tweaking, because they rely on original graphics which would need to be updated to the higher resolution.

I brought in aspect ratios and screen size because those require much more work on the UI (although in many cases the change can be easy) and don't lend themselves to automatic translation. Any app that was written for the original iPhone will still work on current versions, and most likely future versions better than they did on the original. An app written for a long aspect ratio doesn't necessarily translate well to a different one which is stubbier. An app written for a 2.8" screen will look stretched on a 3.7" screen and one written for a 3.7" screen could be unreadable on a 2.8" screen. Actually porting the app to the separate screens could be very easy, but it's not something that could be done automatically very easily.

All of this hinges on whether Apple does a good job on the transition though. If they do pixel doubling like they did on the iPad then being resolution aware would be a must. Done correctly though, multiple resolutions can be done transparently. A good example is the handling of the GPS (which you stated was a compatibility issue). The Core Location framework uses the GPS if available, but can fall back onto approximation by Cell Towers and WiFi hotspots.

Re:Flash? Unlocked?

[sopssa]

Did you forget that Photoshop is foremost a Mac product?

Why would nerds want this?

[Kirin Fenrir]

Can I install my software without Apple's permission yet?

Can I assign my songs directly as ringtones yet?

Can I add my own audio and video codecs yet?

Can I take my phone to another carrier without Apple trying to brick my phone with a firmware update yet?

Can I multitask yet?

Can I use Flash (and watch Hulu) yet?



Yep, I think my n900 is still the phone for nerds. I have a philosophical issue with Apple telling me what i can and can't do with hardware I purchased, when there is no technical reason I cannot do it. I sacrifice a little convenience (the huge app store, Apple's admittedly-slick interface) for my freedom.

Re:Why would nerds want this?

[Lumpy]

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:Why would nerds want this?

[jo_ham]

In the rest of the world (ie, not the USA), you can take your iPhone to whatever carrier you want.

Some nerds might want the iPhone if it does what they need. If not, then there's Android or some other option. I have a 3G and am perfectly happy with it. I don't need to add my own video and audio codecs, I can't get Hulu in the UK (but iPlayer in the UK, which uses flash on the web, works on the iPhone anyway), don't really need multitasking - the apps save state and it's relatively quick to hop between them, but would be nice to have.

Not all nerds need all those things.

Re:Why would nerds want this?

[ducomputergeek]

Ah, but one point you failed to realize: the iPhone is not nor ever was for nerds & geeks. It was for everyone else. And there are a lot more everyone elses. And I for one consider lack of flash to be a feature, not a bug. And as someone who worked in video production in the earlier part of the last decade, H.264 won and for very good reasons. Primarily, it's the best Codec available. We now have a standard to which all devices/software should be writing & playing. The last thing I want to see is a return to Codec Hell.

Regardless I have heard from several people inside ATT that they are loosing exclusively and we're likely to see a CDMA iPhone for Verizon or Sprint later this year. Although if the wireless carriers in the US begin deploying 4G technology (which is supposed to be the same for everyone), then maybe we'll finally see a phone that will work on all carriers.

Re:Why would nerds want this?

[Kirin Fenrir]

I concede the point that they can use other carriers outside the US. I wasn't trying to be Amero-centric, I just forgot that. :)

Re:Why would nerds want this?

[CompressedAir]

I dunno, I'm a pretty big nerd and I love my iPhone. There's plenty of fun to be had with it with the serial tx/rx on the dock connector. I'm getting close to getting it to work with a Picaxe, and once that works the sky is the limit.

Re:Why would nerds want this?

[delinear]

I'm more and more attracted to the HTC Desire, which should give me the best of both worlds, with the freedom of Android (and they're not too shabby App store) but with the slick Sense UI interface. My fiancé has the iPhone and she loves it, and while I was and still am a little tempted to get one for convenience sake, I do get the impression it won't satisfy my tech cravings as much as the HTC, not to mention I'd have to wait until summer while the HTC is all kinds of awesome right now.

Re:Why would nerds want this?

[UnknowingFool]

Can I install my software without Apple's permission yet?

Yes, if you have a developer's license, you may install any software you want on your own phone. Using Apple's iTunes App store will require their permission.

Can I assign my songs directly as ringtones yet?

This is more of a carrier limitation if I remember. I had a Verizon phone and it had the same issue. I would have to pay to get song to be a ringtone even though the phone could be an MP3 player.

Can I add my own audio and video codecs yet?

While technically you can do this, why? It isn't very efficient if you use the mobile device CPU to process these codecs. On a general computer, it's not a big deal. On a mobile device, it's more of an issue with limited power and processing capability. Generally mobile devices have dedicated hardware for codecs.

Can I take my phone to another carrier without Apple trying to brick my phone with a firmware update yet?

Way back in the day, Apple warned that jailbreaking an iPhone may cause problems because of the methods used. You are forcing the device to work in ways not intended. When they released a firmware update that bricked phones, they didn't shed a tear because they warned you. Jailbreakers found a workaround.

Re:Why would nerds want this?

[Kirin Fenrir]

Can I install my software without Apple's permission yet?

Yes, if you have a developer's license, you may install any software you want on your own phone. Using Apple's iTunes App store will require their permission.

So they just give these developer licenses out to whomever asks for them, right? With no fee?

Can I assign my songs directly as ringtones yet?

This is more of a carrier limitation if I remember. I had a Verizon phone and it had the same issue. I would have to pay to get song to be a ringtone even though the phone could be an MP3 player.

Since you can't get unlocked iPhones (through official channels), doesn't that make carrier limitations also iPhone limitations? I don't want carriers dictating the terms of use of hardware to me.

Can I add my own audio and video codecs yet?

While technically you can do this, why? It isn't very efficient if you use the mobile device CPU to process these codecs. On a general computer, it's not a big deal. On a mobile device, it's more of an issue with limited power and processing capability. Generally mobile devices have dedicated hardware for codecs.

People use codecs other than h.264, hard as that is to believe. They also use more than 64k memory, but that didn't stop the industry leader at the time from asking why people would even need more.

Can I take my phone to another carrier without Apple trying to brick my phone with a firmware update yet?

Way back in the day, Apple warned that jailbreaking an iPhone may cause problems because of the methods used. You are forcing the device to work in ways not intended. When they released a firmware update that bricked phones, they didn't shed a tear because they warned you. Jailbreakers found a workaround.

You don't seem to understand: the very idea that you have to "jailbreak" a phone is ridiculous to me. We've come to accept vendor lock-ins and restrictions as just a part of the industry, but they are dangerous shift in power away from consumers and into the hands of providers.

There are other options out there, and as much as /. will hold up torches and pitchforks whenever a media company attempts to implement a new draconian DRM or a government attempts to clamp down on the freedoms we enjoy on the internet, I can hardly understand why so many are willing to accept the same treatment from iPhone OS or Windows Mobile systems.

Re:Why would nerds want this?

[intheshelter]

They're buying a status symbol? That's your argument? Seriously, are you recycling 2002 Microsoft talking points here?

To re-purpose a phrase you incorrectly used, "your lack of understanding of the appeal of the iPhone/iPad is a sad indicator of your lack of understanding of the type of technology that users want."

Re:Front facing camera?

[teg]

So taking pictures of yourself is more important than having a prevew of what you are taking a picture of so it will come out level and properly framed? I fear for the future of photos...

A front facing camera - in addition to the normal one on the back - has been common on other phones for many years. They were part of one of the launching features of 3G - video calls. Unfortunately for the phone companies hoping that this would increase traffic and revenue, noone liked holding their phones half a meter in front of them to do a call and the technology is still unused.

Personally, I hope Apple doesn't add one. It's pointless, and takes space/cost that could be used for other things. I had one on my Nokia N95, and used it once.

Re:Front facing camera?

[pmontra]

I've got phones with both a back facing camera and a front facing camera since 2003. One is for taking pictures, the other one is for video calls or skype. I probably made no more than a couple of such calls in seven years but manufacturers keep insisting to put two cameras in 3G phones here in Europe. I remember that the iPhone was a big departure from this standard when it launched. "Wow, no front facing camera? No MMS? Will it sell?" Maybe this new iPhone version will bring video calls to the masses at last.

Re:Front facing camera?

[sopssa]

Well video call definitely makes phone sex better.

Re:Flash? Unlocked?

[jez9999]

And makes it a royal pain in the ass for people when there is a reason to use it, like live streaming video.

Ponies

[confused one]

Will it have little kittens and ponies too?! Oh yeah, ponies! I want ponies! Black ones and polka-dotted ones, and pink ones too!

Re:Ponies

[Locke2005]

OMG!!! Ponies!!! It's about that time again...

Does no-one remember the past?

[Mr_Silver]

Given that they've barely changed the hardware in the last couple of iterations, I see no reason to suspect that they'll do anything different.

Before the 3GS came out, everyone went mad imagining what kind of new stuff it had and ended up being disappointed. Yet, if they'd looked at past performance, they should have realised they were being hopelessly optimistic.

My prediction is that there will obviously be new software but the hardware will remain largely unchanged with the exception being that they'll change to HSDPA (or maybe even HSUPA).

And nothing else.

Re:Does no-one remember the past?

[Tim C]

The problem with that theory is that they *must* update the hardware eventually, or lose out to the competition.

Re:Does no-one remember the past?

[dfghjk]

What about the hardware loses out to the competition now?

Re:Does no-one remember the past?

[delinear]

I can imagine the faster processor, but I suspect based on past performance that they won't give multi tasking until the iteration after the next, as these are both reasonable selling points in themselves. I also think the front-facing VGA camera is a good possibility, and it if works for them in the press expect the next iPad to have this as its next big selling point. This incremental process seems to be working for them so I agree they're unlikely to throw everything into the next version when they can space it out over two releases and still get the sales, it's infuriating to us geeks who just want the latest, fastest tech, but as a marketing tool it seems to be standing them in good stead.

Re:Flash? Unlocked?

[drinkypoo]

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.

Re:Front facing camera?

[sopssa]

3G elsewhere in the world isn't as bad as in US. Here you can get unlimited 5Mbit/s 3G for $30 a month and its stable connection. Hell, we already have 4G in largest cities (128 Mbit/s downlink and 56 Mbit/s uplink)

What alternatives?

[Comboman]

The iPhone's refusal to adopt Flash ... is among the greatest forces driving development away from Flash and towards alternate platforms.

That's a bit of stretch, especially since the iPhone currently doesn't support any of the alternatives to Flash either (Silverlight, Java, HTML5).

Re:What alternatives?

[yincrash]

a separate youtube application that intercepts youtube embeddings and urls

Where?

[amake]

Here here.

It's "hear, hear".

Re:Where?

[greyline]

True, true.

Re:Front facing camera?

[NekSnappa]

Umm, you do know that iPhone has Wi-Fi right?

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[jo_ham]

Not that the non-Apple-prohibition on multitasking is really useful, but that sequence of steps can be shortened - the apps save state when the home button is pressed (or really should - the apple ones like sms, email etc do), so step 1 and 2 are the same. Locate app and open app can be combined - if it's on the same screen then you just need to touch, else swipe and touch.

8 and 9 are not needed - the app opens to where it was when you pressed the home button in step 1.

Paste.

Step 11 can be removed with careful copying - you just added it to pad the list.

I want the ability to enable multitasking for non-Apple apps as much as the next person, but the iPhone UI was designed from the outset to not need it - it would just be useful to have. Sort of like the one button mouse on OS X - you can do everything in the OS with the left mouse button *only*, but adding the context click with the right mouse button adds usefulness. It's not a requirement. (and yes, I have a Microsoft 2 button mouse with scrollwheel on my iMac, the computer police can come and arrest me any time).

Re:Flash? Unlocked?

[Vectormatic]

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...

Re:Front facing camera?

[Drethon]

Do a search for camera on amazon.com. Tell me how many of the results you would want to use for teleconferencing.

Though I think I'm just in an argumentative mood today, probably shouldn't be posting to slashdot right now...

Re:I have heard this many times before

[UnknowingFool]

I have had an iphone for some time and it was one of the worst purchases I ever made. . . .As with any of us Technophiles, I really enjoy being on the "bleeding edge"(which the iPhone is not on), but I also like to tinker with any currently used technology. After playing with the iPhone for a while, I am ready to run back to the edge.

I think you qualified your assessment. Apple is not really known for bleeding edge. Apple is known for taking technology and making it usable for non-technical people (i.e. general consumers) who don't care about technology and care about usability.

MP3 players existed before the iPod. I had a Diamond Rio PMP300. It worked fine but the software it came with wasn't as usable in the long term. When Apple released the iPod, the fact that the syncing software (iTunes) also worked as a player, ripper/encoder, and later online store made it much more usable.

Smart phones existed before the iPhone: Windows Mobile, Blackberry, etc. I got a WM device from work. It crashes all the time and figuring out something as simple as how to make a conference call is a pain. On the iPhone, it's a button that appears as soon as you move your ear away from the phone. That's much more user friendly.

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[sopssa]

Tell me, what is one of the most popular apps on multi tasking phones? Memory cleanup programs.

Then why haven't I needed such program with Symbian (apart from the early 2000 phones) nor Windows Mobile?

Besides, why would you need a memory cleanup program? You can just close the program that is taking too much memory.

Re:Flash? Unlocked?

[dotgain]

That is not a reason to use Flash. Would banning Hummers would make it a 'royal pain in the ass' when you need to pick your kids up from school?

Re:Flash? Unlocked?

[AvitarX]

And yet lags behind in features on the MAC platform (GPU acceleration, 64-bit).

Re:Front facing camera?

[dotgain]

Fantastic. Now I can use my iPhone in all the places my iPod Touch works! (geddit?)

Re:A4 processor?

[dingen]

The A4 CPU is already in the iPad, so you could have been familiar with it. It's basically a "system on a chip", like the SnapDragon, designed and developed by Apple themselves. It's basically a Cortex-A8 CPU core combined with a PowerVR SGX GPU in one device.

It runs at 1 GHz, it's pretty powerful for the amount of power it consumes and it looks like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ipad-a4.jpg

And it will run on Verizon's network..

[wiredog]

and it will have unicorns and ponies and...

Re:And it will run on Verizon's network..

[GeckoAddict]

Actually, you may not be too far away from an iPhone on Verizon.

Resolution

[sonicmerlin]

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/

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.

Re:A4 processor?

[Vectormatic]

The A4 is a highway in the UK.

Also a highway in the Netherlands, an audi saloon car, the actual model number of the V2 rocket etc...

enjoy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A4

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[karolbe]

Android for example does not allow a memory cleanup program to close other programs (due to security constraints - each application is separated from others). You need root for this...

1PS: One Pixel at a time!!

[DTC-Bob]

New Feature: AT&T will support 1PS: 1 Pixel Per Second!! Who needs 4G? Who cares: Apple is the new BORG.... Time to move the borg from Bill to Steve...

Re:Apple Media Fans In Panic Mode Over Android

[delinear]

I'm really tempted by the HTC Desire - I'd love to be able to hang on until summer and see what the next iPhone has to offer, that was my original plan, but having seen what the Desire does I can't see the next iPhone leapfrogging it, I have a feeling I'd be disappointed if I did wait. Of course, if I cave and buy a Desire next month, you can bet the next iPhone will be the most amazing technological jump forward known to man, I'm pretty much damned if I do and damned if I don't - and "rumours" are no use to me whatsoever...

Comparison of ARM chip performance?

[Anonymous Coward]

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

[Enderandrew]

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:Flash on Linux

[Abcd1234]

Today Linux is the only platform you can get an official 64-bit version of Flash.

Yup, and I have it installed. But it still isn't that great, and for video, inferior to an in-browser solution, IMHO. Heck, AFAIK, it still doesn't use hardware acceleration for video playback ('course, that may no longer be true now, I haven't checked recently).

Re:Flash on Linux

[Enderandrew]

If I run a 64-bit distro, I have to duplicate a ton of libraries in memory to run 32-bit Firefox just for Flash.

With 64-bit Flash, I can run a 100% 64-bit environment and not duplicate all those libraries, thusly cutting down on memory usage.

Slate rumors

[Enderandrew]

Everyone was absolutely convinced the iPad was going to be called the Slate or iSlate. And most of the rumors ($999 pricetag) were wrong. In fact, most Apple speculation proves to be wrong.

The 3G S was definately going to have a higher-resolution OLED screen and front-facing camera, remember?

I certainly hope these new rumors are true, but I'm content to wait for a press release and focus on facts.

Re:Slate rumors

[Obsi]

I certainly hope these new rumors are true, but I'm content to wait for a press release and focus on facts.

Then you'd better wait for technical specs, not a press release. Press releases are just advertisements, nothing more.

Oh, you mean it'll be a Nokia N900?

[Eunuchswear]

"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"

Re:Oh, you mean it'll be a Nokia N900?

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

No, it's going to have actual apps.

Re:Oh, you mean it'll be a Nokia N900?

[Eunuchswear]

Like what? A web browser that works?

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[hattig]

Oh, I wonder how my Android phone allows Advanced Task Killer to kill off third party apps that are draining battery and slowing the device down? And that application is mandatory on Android due to the nature of the system - very few apps have "quit" options.

I don't think Apple did the wrong thing in putting off third-party multitasking for a while after the initial launch. Getting the app switching UI correct is important (not three years to implement important...), as well as ensuring that the hardware can support it (CPU, memory, battery).

My prediction

[jonwil]

Better 3G chip to go with all the carriers that have rolled out various kinds of HSDPA
Same CPU as the iPad (or more likely a version that cuts back the speed and power consumption to account for the smaller battery on the iPhone)
No multitasking (regardless of battery life concerns, Apple would need to "ruin" its perfect UI with some kind of task switcher feature)
No front facing camera (video calling has not taken off in the way phone carriers would like, especially in the US. AFAIK its almost non-existent on AT&T)
Rewritten bootloaders and security to make jailbreaking and unlocking harder
I suspect 802.11n will appear IF apple can find a low power chip that doesn't require devoting too much of the internal space of the iPhone to the antenna.

I predict that there will still be no support for:
Loading apps without going through the app store
Fast 2D drawing APIs (CoreSurface or whatever it is) being able to be used in official apps
External keyboards of any kind
Any peripheral where Apple doesn't get a cut from every unit sold.
Any kind of ability for apps to share data files with each other
Any kind of ability to load arbitrary files onto an iPhone (i.e. a generic "documents" folder)

I also predict that there will continue to be many reasons Apple will reject your app submission, all of which exist as official policy at Apple (and are known to the app store reviewers) and none of which Apple will ever disclose to developers. One of these "unwritten rules" is likely "no apps that mean less revenue for Apple carrier partners such as AT&T"

Re:My prediction

[StuartHankins]

Any kind of ability to load arbitrary files onto an iPhone (i.e. a generic "documents" folder)

Files Lite works great. If the file is supported you can view it also, otherwise you can use the iPod Touch / iPhone as a data storage device and access it via any web browser connected on the same LAN segment (in other words it's not a cloud storage app; I prefer my files to stay local). There's a paid version with more features. Works great for me.

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[dloose]

Oh it seems Apple finally got to 90's computing.

Except that the iPhone already supported multitasking and all of Apple's own apps were able to run in the background. The change is only for third-party apps.

You know what he means though. Yes the OS supports multi-tasking, and yes a few "blessed" apps take advantage of this capability. Still, the fact remains that you can't hear a good song on Last.fm and, while listening to it, switch to the Amazon app to buy the CD (yeah, I still buy CDs... sue me). And that kinda sucks.

Didn't all the Apple fanboys say that not having multitasking to eat out battery life was better?

you said "eat out"

Because it's being marketed as being revolutionary? Oh wait....

C'mon... If the new iPhone has 3rd party multitasking, you know Steve Jobs will be on stage with RDF on full blast saying shit like, "this is a game changer" and calling it the most revolutionary feature since they introduced native apps.

3 year policy?

[swb]

Two years is probably more like it because that's the contract limitation of AT&T before you can get a new, subsidized phone (and another two year signup with AT&T).

My wife has a 3G, which is two years old this year and while its noticeably slower than my 3GS, its not really obsolete. Non-3G iPhones are 3 years old this year and are probably slower and can't use some of the features in 3.0 that 3G phones can, so those might be borderline obsolete even if they can fit some definition of "usable".

Apple may not EOL or intentionally make unusable a 3+ year old phone but it may get to be like PPC Macs that can't move onto higher OS levels.

I tend to agree...

[sean.peters]

I'm an iPhone (3G) user, and found that I really didn't miss true multi-tasking. In practice, the stuff I want to be able to run in the background are the phone, text, and e-mail applications (for obvious reasons), and the iPod app (so I can play music while I'm doing something else). Practically speaking, I never really had any need for, say, Gas Cubby (or really, any 3rd party app) to continue running in the background while I did something else. This is not to say that nobody would ever need this - I can see where people would like to do things like listen to Pandora while doing other things... but so far I've never really needed anything like this.

Re:I tend to agree...

[vux984]

I never really had any need for, say, Gas Cubby (or really, any 3rd party app) to continue running in the background while I did something else.

In large part because the sort of apps that make sense running in the background don't get written in the first place.

Re:Front facing camera?

[TheKidWho]

Because the HTC Evo (4G phone with front facing camera) doesn't have a kick stand to support it on a flat surface?

Packing

[NicknamesAreStupid]

I heard that it will have a 12 inch screen that rolls up into a 3" diameter so you can stick it in your pants. Nerds finally get a toy that impresses the ladies. Did I mention that when the phone is set to vibrate . . .

Re:Packing

[Locke2005]

How long does the battery last if my gf keeps calling herself over and over and over...

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[dloose]

App Store is a seriously controlled environment and they already impose strict guidelines for developers. How does an idle application even eat up more battery? It's not like your RAM needs more power if it's used a little bit more. The background app doesn't need to do any drawing and is usually on pause (unless it needs to do certain tasks in the background, and then it makes sense).

Because the apps you want multitasking for aren't idle. That's the whole point. If an app doesn't have anything to do in the background, then who cares if it quits when you click the home button? Aside from a slightly longer start time, you won't even notice. The whole idea is to have IM apps that run constantly and music apps like Pandora and Last.fm that continue playing when you switch to another app.

Because you have to travel the menus to locate your app you just switched out from and load up whatever you were doing, and even to perform a quick copy-paste you need to:
1) save your document
2) close app 1
3) locate app 2
4) open app 2
5) copy
6) close app 2
7) locate app 1
8) load up the document you were working with
9) scroll to the point you wanted to paste to
10) paste
11) do the same again because your copypaste missed something

Yeah, seems really convenient and simple.

Your list has nothing to do with multitasking... It's entirely about switching between applications. If today's iPhone had 3rd party multitasking, the steps you listed wouldn't change, except:

Step 1: I haven't seen an iPhone app with a "save" gesture. Maybe some of them exist, but most apps just save your changes automatically.
Steps 8 & 9: Good iPhone apps (which, admittedly, is a small set) take care of these for you by saving their state when you quit.

Re:Flash? Unlocked?

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you forget that Photoshop was foremost a Mac product?

FTFY

Quoted for funny

[sopssa]

According to TFA, 960x640.

Yeah, which is actually 4x times the current resolution of 480 x 320, instead of 2x like mentioned in the summary.

Oh god. On slashdot, really?

Re:Front facing camera?

[puto]

Where is here? South America it sucks.

Unannounced Firefox bug?

[93 Escort Wagon]

There must be some sort of DNS spoofing exploit that's currently being used to attack Firefox - my browser's address bar says slashdot.com but I'm obviously on macrumors.com.

Re:Flash? Unlocked?

[Achromatic1978]

Sorry, I'm just trying to recollect - if you could remind me, that would be awesome - just who are you to tell me what I should or shouldn't be using to do something?

Have you considered a career at Apple?

Re:Apple Media Fans In Panic Mode Over Android

[ColdWetDog]

I'm really tempted by the HTC Desire

Tempted by desire, eh? Son, don't go there - it will end badly for you, always does. Just keep your emotions in check and your brain out of your penis and you'll do OK.

Otherwise, well, you're toast.

Re:Front facing camera?

[Syberz]

Ok, I really need someone to explain to me why they abosolutely must use videoconferencing on their phone. What's wrong with a laptop? Why does the person you're talking to need to see you so bad that they can't wait for you to get into the office or to your computer?

The only times I've used video conferencing was in board meetings with multiple people attending on each so I don't really see what other uses there are.

Frankly I'd prefer a radio tuner over a camera on my phone/music player. It'd be useful when attending events that have their own broadcasts (F1 and Nascar racing comes to mind).

Bluetooth Keyboard drivers

[tekrat]

Add to your list "Can I use a keyboard with it?" For those of us that think of the iPhone as a computing platform rather than a toy and we might actually want to use it to take notes in a meeting, or compose an email.

The iPhone is capable of email, and yet, their software keyboard only lets you type messages that say "Tbrn tgnsje jwe sdfb".

The killer is Apple themselves sell a bluetooth keyboard. But they don't let you pair it with an iPhone. They will let you pair with a Mac or an iPad. Apple killed Macally's product which was to be a folding keyboard specifically designed for the iPhone.

WTF? I'm not buying an iPhone until I can use a keyboard because I cannot type on that cruddy software keyboard. And I will buy the first smartphone that does let you hook up a REAL keyboard and has a notes application (like the older Palm Treos). Why is it that older tech works better than newer (like older VCRs weren't affected by macrovision) ?

Re:Bluetooth Keyboard drivers

[Cederic]

And I will buy the first smartphone that does let you hook up a REAL keyboard and has a notes application

Nokia n900 works with bluetooth keyboards (full 105 key ones), has TV-out if you want to hook it up to a fullsize screen and has both built-in and downloadable notes apps (which I find as usable as the one on my Treo).

I strongly suspect you could get an Android phone with similar capabilities (possibly not the tv out) but haven't had a play with any Android v2.1 phones yet.

The title should mention this is a rumor

[mcguyver]

Note to sensationalist Slashdot mods. This is a rumor, that's significant info, note that in the title. Please say that /. hasn't degraded to the point of disguising apple rumors as legit stories on the homepage. Feel free to mod this down but some long time /. readers have got to be thinking the same thing.

Re:WTF? WSF - reliable?

[necro81]

That may be. However, if you'd bothered to actually look at the WSJ article, you'd see that it wasn't written by Mossberg. This was a business news story, not a product review. And, if you'd bothered to read it, you'd have seen that it was a rather dispassionate report about the likelihood of the new model and who might carry it, not a gushing screed about how awesome Apple is by finally delivering its gorgeous Jesus-phone from the evil clutches of AT&T.

Blazing?!?

[boiert]

Why is the A4 blazing? Isn't it just another ARM derivate?

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[Moridineas]

App Store is a seriously controlled environment and they already impose strict guidelines for developers. How does an idle application even eat up more battery? It's not like your RAM needs more power if it's used a little bit more. The background app doesn't need to do any drawing and is usually on pause (unless it needs to do certain tasks in the background, and then it makes sense).

Really, are you joking? The vast majority of apps that would work well as backgrounded apps are network connected apps. Things like IM clients, GPS tracking, etc. When you're looking at a cellphone, "drawing" is hardly the biggest power draw, think about 3g, turning the antenna on and constantly transmitting, and using GPS. Big drains.

Re:Flash? Unlocked?

[Achromatic1978]

You appear to have confused the words 'need' and 'choice', with unfortunate consequences for your argument.

A4 seem quite big for a phone

[davrob60]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A4_paper#A_series

Re:Front facing camera?

[Achromatic1978]

Frankly I'd prefer a radio tuner over a camera on my phone/music player. It'd be useful when attending events that have their own broadcasts (F1 and Nascar racing comes to mind).

Nokia N97. Front/back cameras (and the main camera is much nicer than the iPhone). Radio tuner, and transmitter. Mine has 64GB storage... had a few issues with early firmware, but now running quite well.

Blazing???

[cbope]

An A4 is blazing? Seriously? But can it multitask?

Re:Blazing???

[Mhtsos]

Yes it can, every other phone with the same core does. The fact that apple chose not to allow multitasking in its OS is not because of lack of support from the processor.

Re:Flash? Unlocked?

[dotgain]

And you appear to have simply drummed up whatever context best suits your argument.

I posted in response to someone asserting that 'streaming video' is a reason to use 'flash'. I do not find that agreeable at all. You not being able to run a particular platform the way you want is another discussion, and one I won't be having with you. Furthermore, the AC to which you respond seems under no illusion as to the meaning of the word "need".

You not having the choice to run Flash is not relevant to the discussion as whether it is required to play streaming video, or whether its omission is a Good Thing.

I forgot Step 11...

[jo_ham]

11. Post AC, claiming that the post you disagree with is full of trolling and flamebait, but lacking the stones to say so with your own account.

What will the gimmick be this time?

[viamptor]

How will Apple deem this evolution of the iphone "revolutionary" with these specs?? What will make it different than phones like the HTC EVO4G? which seems have better specs or the HTC scorpion which is rumored to have a dual core 1.3 or 1.5 ghz processor?

The future is here!

[Locke2005]

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... and a 20 minute battery life when using all these new features!

Re:4x not 2x

[pclminion]

In image processing, resolution is the number of dots per unit length. That's one dimensional. Nobody EVER talks about resolution as dots per unit area.

If you double the horizontal and vertical resolution, you quadruple the number of pixels. Well congratulations, you've discovered the concept of squaring a number. But that's not what resolution means, and nobody who knows the terminology would ever interpret it that way.

iPhoneHD Pro

[Monoman]

I have a 1st gen iPhone. Now with all of the options out there now I just can't see sticking Apple unless they surprise us all. On top of the HD specs I would like to see a Pro model aimed at office professionals (I know that is so not Apple). This Pro model needs a memory card slot, a physical keyboard, a replaceable battery or longer life, better camera, etc.

There is definitely a market for the device and would somewhat fit in with Apple's other Pro products.

Who cares about power draw?

[Aqualung812]

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.

Re:Who cares about power draw?

[Moridineas]

I do too, I agree those would be awesome (and hopefully coming in iPhone 4.0). My point was just to disagree with the GP who claimed that background apps WOULDN'T typically take much battery because they don't draw to the screen.

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[bonch]

Oh it seems Apple finally got to 90's computing. Didn't all the Apple fanboys say that not having multitasking to eat out battery life was better?

It did save battery life. Microsoft isn't allowing multitasking in Windows 7 Mobile either for the same reasons Apple didn't allow it. If this rumor true, it's a new system design with a new chip that must improve battery life enough to allow for more (likely strictly controlled) multitasking. If the new iPhone OS allows for multitasking, undoubtedly the iPad would see its OS upgraded as well. It's common sense.

Your post is an awful troll. You tried way too hard and weren't subtle enough. I suggest spending more time in your cave, hating all happiness in the world.

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[bonch]

Yes, let's pretend apps don't save their state when closed. Really lame troll.

Re:Flash? Unlocked?

[jo42]

That's because Apple doesn't give access to corresponding API's.

Total bullshit. Adobe is too fecking lazy to rewrite Photoshop to use Cocoa.

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[Dishevel]

Just exactly WHAT in this video looks "10 years out of date", or reminds one of a "slow ass car"?

Umm. What is so great about a very large smart phone that can not make a phone call?

Obviously, the UI really IS that cool

I believe that I covered that fact that the Lady looks good and dresses well. That I believe is what all the fanboys are paying for. Right?

So, fucktard. Get your trolling facts straight.

Ok. They are straight. Just because I point out that Apple is more of a beautiful, expensive whore that won't let you have sex with her unless that sex act is first full approved by the pimp first is no reason to get your panties all up in a wad. Relax.

You already know Apple is all about the looks and the UI. They do not innovate. They build what has been built before, dumb it down so the stupid can be as useful as the capable then put forth the greatest marketing machine ever built to sell it. They do what they do well. But don't pretend they are something they are not.

Have fun fuming over this post and try not to spit out your "Half-Caf, No Foam, Soy Latte".

Mod abuse

[mdwh2]

Indeed. It's sad that you get modded down - Apple stories are the only ones I have to browse at -1, because of the abuse from the Apple fans who seem to get all the mod points these days. Note to mods: just because someone doesn't share your love of a particular product, doesn't make it flamebait.

The joke is the way that features magically become important, only when the Iphone has them. It's bad enough that anything the Iphone can do is important, and anything the Iphone can't do is "Why would I need that?", but the funniest bit is that they can completely change their minds, when the Iphone finally gets the feature.

3G, MMS, copy/paste, video recording - it happened with all of these things. Now it'll be the same for multitasking, front facing cameras, along with Java and Flash if it finally adds those basic features. Similarly with resolution - my 5800, right now, has twice the resolution of an Iphone, at half the price. But no, you don't hear anyone raving about that. But the moment there's a mere rumour that a future Apple iVapourware product will have a higher resolution, it's suddenly front page news. And they're even going to call it "Iphone HD" to signify that that's the most advanced feature it has (and improvement over the embarrassment of "Iphone 3G" - wow, welcome to 2005. I thought all the 3G hype was over five years ago).

Remember all those years that we heard that one mouse button made things simpler, yet on the Iphone it's supposed to be better to have to remember complex multitouch gestures? Personally I'll stick with my 5800, that I can't even use with gloves on.

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[mdwh2]

Except that the iPhone already supported multitasking and all of Apple's own apps were able to run in the background.

By that logic, any bog standard feature phone around since 2005 at least has been able to multitask, because you could run the built in apps together, and it's only the 3rd party apps that don't multitask.

(Not to mention - the non-installed "apps" are the thing that Iphone users rave about the most, so if they run at crippled functionality, that's a major bug, that's laughable in a phone pretending to be a smartphone. Why is the Iphone considered a smartphone, and other phones that can "multitask", by your definition, not?)

In many cases, yes, it is better that third-party apps couldn't run in the background. Considering how poor of quality many third-party iPhone apps are, it's a great thing that they couldn't sit around in the background eating up battery.

So you will now argue that the Iphone is a poorer product, as it can multitask, right?

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[mdwh2]

I can get away with multitasking on my 5800. No one's claiming it's needed - I mean, nothing's needed on a phone, anyway. If you only want basic necessities, you can do with a cheap $50 phone. But multitasking is very useful to have on a 5800, and if I was paying twice the price, I'd expect that, and more.

And if the Iphone is so simply designed, why is multitouch required?

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[mdwh2]

Really, are you joking? The vast majority of apps that would work well as backgrounded apps are network connected apps.

And they work so much better as background apps when the Apple phones don't have the ability to run them?

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[mdwh2]

*shrugs* I guess that's Android for you. I've no problems on my 5800.

I don't think Apple did the wrong thing in putting off third-party multitasking for a while after the initial launch.

So now they'll allow it, you'll start saying it's bad for the Apple phones too?

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[mdwh2]

If Microsoft's new mobile OS doesn't allow multitasking, then that's poor too. And I have to laugh - given how much Windows Mobile is hated around here, especially by Iphone fans, I see it's now being hailed as a good example of a mobile OS?

No, personally I'm doing okay with Nokia, like 40% of the market.

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[jo_ham]

Multi-touch is what *makes* it simple to use - no need for a set of buttons to toggle a zoom tool - just pinch, no need for a button to go between images/pages - just swipe, no need to have a button for selecting text, just tap and drag.

The gestures enabled by multi touch are one of the reasons the UI is nice and simple.

AT&T sucks

[chappel]

God I hope the new iPhone has a model that will run on Verizon. I don't care if it actually DOES, or if it is ever supported by VZW, I just want AT&T to feel enough pressure to make an effort to suck less.

I bought a 3Gs iPhone last fall, anticipating spending much of my time in Dallas. My reality turned out a bit different, now I'm living in rural Minnesota. I'm still forced to pay full price for 'unlimited' data, even though haven't seen a 3G connection since October. I was promised tethering was 'just around the corner', too - not that it matters - it'd be faster to walk to a hotspot than use a tethered EDGE connection. Now I see AT&T is budgeting major expansions in MN - all around the metro area, still 100 miles outside my stomping grounds. North and South Dakota aren't even on the AT&T map. I was recently visiting Warroad, MN, on the Canadian border, and couldn't even make a voice call. Crookston doesn't even have EDGE service. AT&T pisses and moans about folks who actually take them for their word about 'unlimited' data, but I'd sure like to have my bill cut back as compensation for not getting ANY 3G service. On the up side, I keep the 3G radio off and get GREAT battery life.

I know lots of /.ers will think I'm an idiot 'fanboy' for keeping the iPhone, but I really like the apps I've got on it - I use it for billing, task management, weather and flight planning and lots of other stuff - and the apps integrate nicely with my macbook. I'd have gone with a droid/google phone, but at the time it was only available on T-Mobile, and I KNEW that wouldn't work for me. In the future I'm worried that the droid platform will be so windows-centric that I'll get the short end of the cool app stick as a mac user.

For the moment I feel like I'm watching a race to see who wins - the Droid to provide apps I need on their vastly superior VZW coverage, or AT&T to expand the coverage for their superior apps. Maybe I should just trade the iPhone in for a Touch in the mean time. :-(

Re:And this is different from the 10000 other rumo

[macs4all]

Umm. What is so great about a very large smart phone that can not make a phone call?

Um, because it isn't a very large smart phone? For example, can you run something as sophisticated as Keynote, Pages, or Numbers on any phone, large or small?

I believe that I covered that fact that the Lady looks good and dresses well. That I believe is what all the fanboys are paying for. Right?

So, every single person who purchases an iPad is a "fanboy"? I think you need to up your meds.

You already know Apple is all about the looks and the UI. They do not innovate. They build what has been built before, dumb it down so the stupid can be as useful as the capable then put forth the greatest marketing machine ever built to sell it.

Really? I guess there was no innovation in this, or this, or this, or this, or this. Why are there no examples of those hardware and software products PRIOR to Apple releasing them?. And why oh why do they keep winning industry awards year after year?

Are all those people fanboys, too?

Have fun fuming over this post and try not to spit out your "Half-Caf, No Foam, Soy Latte".

Sorry to disappoint you; but I'm strictly a Folgers/Walmart Half&Half/Splenda (I'm diabetic) sorta guy. Only been in a Starbucks once in my entire life. Don't even get the fake cappuccino at the fast food joints.