Iphone 6S screen resolution better than the Iphone 6?

Hi,
i know this is an too early question but how many of you iphone pro's think that apple will implement a screen with higher resolution than the iphone 6 with its 326 ppi
i know they never upgraded the screen on the S models but i have read that the iphone 6s will come with LTPS (Low Temperature Poly-Silicon)-display
and that can have a pixel density of 500 ppi
is this possible or very unlikely?
thank you in advance

It doesn't matter how long Apple users here have purchased their products, Apple is notorious for product secrecy and if anyone did know they would have signed a non-disclosure agreement.
If you are looking for rumors try sites like MacRumors, AppleInsider, TechCrunch, etc.

Similar Messages

Is the iPhone 5 better than the Samsung Galaxy S4/Lumia 1020?

Is the iPhone 5 better than the Samsung Galaxy S4/Lumia 1020?

Like almost everything in this world is a matter of choice, but, if it is to logically make a choice here are a few criteria you should consider before picking up a smartphone:
Do you really need it? - if not, the money will stay better in your account;
Set up the budget and consider the fact that smartphones get upgrades faster than computers and laptops, will you be able to upgrade?
Which operating system are you familiar with?
What are your needs and expectations from the smartphone?
What type of person you are (email/chat/SMS/Social Media-man aka. communications, multimedia, productivity, gamer, etc.) this will help you chose the appropriate hardware and check out what are your options regarding the existing applications for your needs;
Are you always on the run or work in an office? - this will help you decide from the battery life point of view;
If you own a tablet you might just need a simple smartphone.
Samsung does not really innovate in terms of functionality and usability, they only copy what others do and make it their own way. Android is not a mature operating system, yet. I like some of its features, of course, but I can rely on it when it comes to productivity as I'm a person who sends 100's of emails per day and need to easily manage the messages.
You can have the best hardware in the world but that's useless if you operating system is bad at managing those resources, you will not be able to exploit the device to the fullest and you might cry over the money you've spent :-) Nevertheless Samsung has a large market share, makes good phones, but not quite smart, they are rather... intelligent, a smartphone is smart from the day you buy it, you don't have to put it in training mode :-)
As about Lumia, I don't have much to say, it's what iPhone had at the iPhone 4 version minus the 40MP camera and the operating system. If I want a good camera then I buy a camera, a Canon or Nikon :-) Yes, the Krait CPU, so what? That CPU is managed by a Wi*dows OS and that should say everything. I'm not against Micr*soft, they had/have their part in technology progress, but I'm more into stable operating systems, I'd chose Android over Wi*dows, yet Nokia were always great at hardware and batery life. Bad choice for Nokia, look at their sales and you will understand.
That's just my two cents, but iPhone is the choice of millions when they chose their first smartphone: is user friendly, solid, great hardware specs, lovely screen, wonderful support, high-level security, multimedia at its best, a design that catches the eye, looks and feels great in your hand, it's light, you have millions of verified apps in the store and a nice community to tell you all these :-)

Is the 17 inch better than the 15 inch mac book pro?

Which one is better to get and use? 15 or 17 inch?

I have both. One is not necessarily better than the other, really depends on what you plan on using the computer for. Even though the 17" is classified as a portable computer, IMO it's not very portable at all. Go to a store, view handle each for yourself. The 17" is quite large, mine sits on a desk as a desktop replacement. In terms of performance, equipped the same(processor, RAM & GPU), there is only about a 3% performance gain with the 17". Not enough to write home about. The big advantage of the 17" is screen real estate. But, if you want portability, get the 15".

Its the nano better than the mini?????

why is the nano better than the mini?? if it is???

well, it IS smaller! I find the Mini's screen easier for my old eyes to read. I have NO personal experience (other than holding and playing with a Nano in the store) with a Nano, as I'm waiting for Apple to improve scratch resistance before I buy one. IF they don't, I won't. Other than a minor problem of distortion when using the bass boost EQ on a Mini, I'm not aware of any pervasive issues with them. My wife's works like a charm. I'm a 40GB iPod owner myself. It works great, also. having said that, I'd still like a Nano IF APPLE TOUGHENS UP THE CASE.

Screen resolution in all the programs is really low.

I recently bought CS6 and the screen resolution in all the programs is extremely low. The tools and the content of the documents. I have checked the preferences and I don't see a problem or an option to increase the quality.
Can anyone help me?
Thanks

If this is a retina Mac there is nothing you can do about it. CS6 is not optimized for retina.
If that’s not what you’re talking about we’ll need some real details.

ATI Radeon HD 4870 not better than the Nvidea Geforce 120?

I bought av new ATI Radeon HD 4870 card to my MacPro. But are wery disappointed. My old NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 performes almost better than ATI. I ran Cinebench test and this is the results:
*NVIDIA GeForce*
Rendering (Single CPU): 3225 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 18880 CB-CPU
Multiprocessor Speedup: 5.85
Shading (OpenGL Standard): 6107 CB-GFX
*ATI Radeon HD 4870*
Rendering (Single CPU): 3218 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 18852 CB-CPU
Multiprocessor Speedup: 5.86
Shading (OpenGL Standard): 5846 CB-GFX
I also ran the Photoshop Actiontest from www.retouchartists.com on a large .tiff file, and my ATI Radeon used 1,10,2 and NVidea used 1,09,4. That is almost 1 second better for the old card.
Apple says that the ATI 4870 card performs 2x better than the Nvidea 120. That is not my experience!

Hello,
I currently have a 2008 3.0Ghz Harpertown mac pro and I am trying to figure out what to do here. I just purchased the 24 inch cinema display, but yet I have a nice 1GB 4870 ati radeon I got off ebay. Its more powerful than the Apple version, but lacks the mini-display port.
Currently, I have the ATI RADEON 2600 XT connected, though inactive, while my 4870 is active.
So, should I just get the Nvidia GT 120 and keep my 1GB 4870, or should I get rid of the 4870 I have and just buy Apple's? Either way, the GT 120 works in a 2008 mac pro despite what Apple says on their site that it only works in 2009 mac pros.

When transferring volumes to a new drive, is a cloning app better than the finder?

When transferring volumes to a new drive, is a cloning app better than the finder?
I’m adding a new (bigger) external hard drive. I have created five partions on it as the old drive has. Is it, better, faster, more accurate, etc. to use an app, or just drag and drop the folders on to the new partitions. The sofware I have are; TechTool6, Drive Genius3 & SuperDuper. Two of the partitons have a Mac OS on them. The others just have files.
Thanks,
Larry

If the drive is to be functional as a boot drive then cloning is the better approach as it will grab all hidden configuration files and preserve the file access permissions properly; however, if you are setting up a data drive then the Finder's copy options should be adequate. To ensure file permissions are properly attributed to the copied files, select them and press Command-C to copy, followed by Shift-Option-Command-V to paste the items in the new location and preserve their file attributes (you may need to authenticate when copying them in this manner). If you do not need to preserve permissions then a basic drag-and-drop copy should suffice.

Is the external isight better than the internal?

I have a macbook, but I am considering purchasing an external isight as well. I know the external has auto focus (I do not believe the internal does) but I am more interested in color. Does the external have better color and low-light picture? Is the same 1/4 inch chip from the external used in the internal, or is the internal a lessor chip?
I enjoy the macbooks isight, but I would like to make some movies with iMovie. The internal is not overly impressive with it's colors when doing this. Sharpness is also not excellent, it seems the external will definitly improve upon this.
Any input is greatly appreciated. I would really like to hear from owners of both cameras who could possibly compare and contrast these two.
Kalel

Hi Kalel,
I agree with Eddie. I have an external mounted on my G5 at the office and an internal on an Intel iMac at home. If nothing else, the ability to reposition makes the external the hands down winner.
Personally, I believe the external records ambient light better than the internal, but I have different lighting situations at both locations.
Both the internal and external have autofocus.
One of the best additions you can get for either one is a program called iGlasses. I has been mentioned many times in this forum with plenty of user comments.
Good Luck
John

Why are the jpgs that are generated in my camera better than the ones i create from the nef file in camera raw?

i shoot raw+ jpg in camera, for some reason the jpgs that come from my camera (nikon D300) always seem better than the jpgs i create
from the nef files in camera raw. i am saving at the highest quality. the jpgs from the camera seem to have more detail in highlights
better color more vibrant, sharper. could my camera be doing some enhancements to the jpgs before processing?

I had similar thoughts back when I first started shooting raw. Really, it's just a matter of editing to your personal taste.
Yes, that camera applies lots of presets before creating the jpeg, as Trevor.Dennis mentioned. Also, as he said, you can far surpass native jpegs with raw.
If you need it more vibrant, make it so. If you need to bring down the highlights, do so. Need sharpening? Apply some.
Here is one of my edits that I made a tutorial of: Sunrise Raw File Edit - Adobe Lightroom - Landscape Photography - YouTube. It is one of my less dramatic edits, but still a good one.
I don't want to clutter this thread with links, but if you take a look at my Facebook page, I put a lot of before and afters up in January and February. A Google search for Benjamin Root Photography will bring it up.
I shoot in raw, and highly recommend it.
I'll leave you with a nice NEF RAW file before and after:
BTW, D300 is a nice camera, I've used it...
Benjamin

The top of my iPod touch screen is darker than the rest of my screen after the newest update?

So today I turned on my iPod touch (5th generation) and it said there was a software update available. I updated it with no problem, but after the update I noticed almost half of my screen was darker than the rest at the top. (Posting screenshots below) I don't know if it's supposed to be like that because of the update or not. Also, I have a little blue dot (assuming it's a 'dead' or 'stuck' pixel) on my screen that was there when I bought the ipod BRAND NEW on February 13th of this year and I'd like to know if that may be affecting it? Any help would be appreciated!
The darker top screen:
Using apps and Safari the screen is normal:

Hi iBridgetx3,
You can try several things:
1. Go to Settings>Wallpapers & Brightness, and turn the Brightness up or down
2. Go to Settings>General>Accessibility>Increase Contrast, and play with the three options available there - I turned off Reduce Transparency, and turned on Darken Colors and Reduce White Point, because I like the color gradation on the wallpaper on my Home screen. But if you don't like it, then make sure Darken Colors is off, and try that with Reduce White Point both off and on to see what you like best
There are a lot of new settings specifically designed to address the variety of problems that people were having with the initial iOS 7 "look". Play around with them. You will probably find a combination that will suit you.
Cheers,
GB

Is the Mountain Lion so much better than the Snow Leopard that make it worth buying?

Is the Mountain Lion so much better than the Snow Leopard that I'm currently using and worth the money to buy it? Is it more or less confusing to operate?

OS X 10.7-18.0+ will NOT run any current PPC based programs your running.
http://roaringapps.com/apps:table
If you have a MacPro like your signature says (the tower, not the laptop) then it's not going to have much of a performance loss as say the MacBook Pro's will.
Older, less powerful Mac's have performance losses with the newer OS X Lions, it might be best to stick with 10.6.8 on a older machine until it drops, then spend the money on all new software on a newer machine instead.
One guy was here today and had a 2007 Intel Core 2 Duo and it was struggling to run OS X Mountain Lion, Chrome and Photoshop.
It just didn't have the hardware horsepower for all that bloatware.
My advice if it's not a top end iMac or MacPro, then 2010 is the cut-off point, those 2010 machines and earlier are likely better off on 10.6.8 max.
It all depends upon one's perception of performance really.

In what way Exchange Server 2013 archiving is better than the other 3rd party application ?

Hi All,
Can anyone here please share some thoughts and comments regarding of which feature of Exchange Server 2013 archiving is better than the 3rd Party application like Symantec Enterprise Vault ?
Any comments and suggestion would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks
/* Server Support Specialist */

It's free.
Ed Crowley MVP "There are seldom good technological solutions to behavioral problems."
yes, as long as we are using the Exchange Server 2013 Enterprise Edition.
/* Server Support Specialist */

IPod better than the nano?

Do you think that the nano is better than the real iPods? I think that the real iPod is better than the nano because it has all the same features as the nano execpt the nano is smaller. But the real iPod makes up for that by having more songs than the nanos. So what do you think?

i love my nano its the best.
Nano 4GB black,Moto RAZR V3 black, PSP, all kinds of cases for nano,radio/remote Windows XP <img src="http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e13/superman5656/s.gif"align="right"</span>

Song on youtube sounds better than the on bought on iTunes

Hi,
Having just migrated to iTM, I was having a listen to some songs when I noticed one song - Gigi's 'Bale Washintu' - sounded distorted on the chorus (around 3:45).
To doublecheck it wasn't my speakers or soundcard I played the youtube version and it sounded better than the one on my iTM.
To doublecheck doublecheck I bought the original song again from iTunes and STILL the youtube version sounded less distorted.
Can the Youtube version be better sounding then a 256kbps itunes download??

Keep in mind, if you bought this from Apple or an Apple Store, you only have 14 days from initial purchase to return it for a full refund (in the USA at least).
If it is past that 14 day window, you will have to sell it privately and then buy a different machine.
If you bought from an Apple authorized reseller, then be sure to check what their return period and polciy is.

Is the range of the extreme better than the express ?

IS the range of the extreme better than the express ?

My extreme seems to have better range also, although my extreme and express are located in different parts of my home. The extreme has an extra antenna, which aside from allowing a faster throughput speed, helps with range as well.

Iphone 6S screen resolution better than the Iphone 6?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for