Skip to Content

iPhone devsugar: Working with tablet resolutions

Rumors are hitting the ground hard and strong about exactly what to expect in the upcoming (yeah, yeah, possibly mythical) Apple tablet device. And the most important of those rumors, the fact most consistently cited, is the introduction of extra pixels. You might roll your eyes and say, "of course a tablet means more pixels," but what exactly does that extra resolution mean to you as a developer? After all, we don't know what the pixel count will be or whether the (possibly mythical) tablet will offer widget-mode applications using the current iPhone resolution size or full-screen options. So let's look at some of the challenges having extra screen space might offer up developers.

For example, the (possibly mythical) tablet might run what essentially amounts to iPhone Rosetta -- little virtual iPhone apps running in their own little simulator windows, 20-pixel-high status bar and all (we aren't sure the tablet will run on ARM or not). And those 20 pixels matter. Many iPhone devs have designed their apps for 320-by-460 or 480-by-300 screen geometries, the geometries that have been native to the iPhone and iPod touch throughout the first three generations of devices. (Strictly speaking, the iPhone is in its 2nd generation with the 3GS and the iPod touch is in its 3rd with the latest model unit.)

Take away the status bar, however, and you're dealing with just the first break in the geometry story. Apple doesn't offer specific UIKit-based calls for querying standard items like 44-pixel navigation bar presentations. When moving between an iPhone and a tablet, that's the kind of information that an application should be able to find out for itself.

With an expected (and currently hypothetical) 960-by-1440 minimum resolution, tablet software doesn't just have to change aspect ratios but also deal with magnification. Art that looks terrific at 320x480 may not look so hot at 960x1440. Although Apple has always encouraged developers to design for resolution independence, the fact remains that most iPhone artists have delivered photoshop-quality art at device-level resolution. In my experience, sadly little development has centered on vector-graphic-based art. Consider the image at the top of this post, showing a screen shot from my App Store Draw application at the original resolution (top-left insert) and zoomed in to 960x1440. Simply scaling up art is not an Apple-worthy option. (Do note, however, that vector art can have anti-aliasing issues of its own.)

Apple's current SDK offers little in the way of resolution control or querying. You can ask a shared UIScreen object to report its dimensions and provide an "application frame" to fit your application into, but little more. The calls just aren't there yet -- although hopefully a 4.0 SDK would provide hooks to allow exactly that.

In response to this kind of uncertainty, iPhone developer (and talented High School student) Jacob Bandes-Storch has been developing the open source ResKit project at github. ResKit offers "a library for testing resolution-independent iPhone OS applications". You can establish it to run with a simulated screen size of 800x600 for example, to see how your application works at that given size. The screen shot to the right shows ResKit in action, displaying its virtual screen.

And while pixels are important, they won't provide the only developer challenge for migrating iPhone OS applications. Because when the touch screen dimensions change, so does the way a user's hand can interact with that screen. A larger screen means more hand lifting and movement. Imagine a standard landscape game running in a standard 480-by-300 window floating in the middle of a 7- or 10-inch tablet.

Now imagine trying to thumb-control any touch-based buttons at the bottom-left and -right of that floating window. Not going to happen, at least with a window in the middle of the screen for normal-sized hands. It's time to start designing for a one-hand-to-hold-and-one-hand-to-manipulate reality. Because any applications that are not full-screen will have to deal with a floating ocean of space when presenting their GUIs.

And even if you scale up, and move your game into a full-screen total resolution mode, consider the simple physical weight of a tablet device. If your users are going to hold it in such a way that their thumbs can manipulate buttons at the bottom of the screen, think about what the simple weight of the device will do to their interactivity. To get a sense of this, pick up any standard DVD movie case. Hold it in landscape position and manipulate it as if you were manipulating a thumb-based tablet game. The tipping backwards you'll experience from just a lightweight plastic case gives only a hint of what a more solid device will do when grasped in a similar fashion.

There's the accelerometer to consider as well. Because accelerometer readings simply may not make sense for any application that is not centered on the screen. Think about it: what does tipping a device to the left mean to an off-centered floating widget application, let alone one that doesn't have the current focus (assuming a multi-application environment as the tablet would likely support).

These are just a few big issues: resolution, geometry, widget-based windows, touch/grasp limitations, device manipulation differences, and physical device limitations Between these, a lot of App Store offerings may need to re-think, re-design, and re-engineer their offerings.

A January SDK refresh would go a long way towards allowing developers a head start for addressing these issues. If Apple follows previous years, however, the SDK launch may lag months behind the product announcement. So developers are warned to really think through each of the issues I've mentioned and start planning now how they can keep their applications current and device-appropriate.

Expect Apple as well to repeat the 3.0 migration experience. Remember how apps were tested for 3.0? I wouldn't be surprised to see "Tested for Tablet" certifications to start appearing in App Store, especially if there is a processor shift away from ARM. Certifying apps would give a better idea to consumers as to which items will run smoothly on their new systems. As, iPhone developer John Fricker points out, " I think we can safely assume that Feb will be known as 'Refactor Hell Month' if the tablet runs iPhone OS."

Thanks Landon Fuller, Scott Lawrence, Avi, John Fricker, tehbaut

(p.s. As a side note, a front-mounted camera might make the cameraViewTransform property of the UIImagePickerController class finally make sense.)

Rumors are hitting the ground hard and strong about exactly what to expect in the upcoming (yeah, yeah, possibly mythical) Apple tablet...
 

Add a Comment

*0 / 3000 Character Maximum

19 Comments

Filter by:
christapher

Did we not learn from assuming the (then mythical) iPhone would be predominately an iPod in function with added phone features? When it was released, it was released as a whole new ecosystem for development and distribution. Who is to say that the tablet will even be centered on using existing iPhone app structure? It seems pretty illogical as you have described there are many hurdles facing a direct port.

I would think iPhone virtualization would be only a minimal part of the feature set, if a part at all. Most of the apps I use on my iPhone would be silly directly blown up to 10" and not redesigned entirely to take advantage of the larger screen. Tweetie with 72pt type comes to mind. The relationship of desktop to iPhone versions of apps is not just a direct port of the desktop version, that wouldnt make sense.

Why would I pay $1000+ for something that runs the apps that are already in my pocket 24/7 without any added functionality? I dont need a bigger iPhone, give me something new if you want my money.

Another thing, iSlate? Really? Everyone was calling the (then mythical) Apple set-top box iTV and it came out as Apple TV. iSlate sounds like a cheap knockoff accessory, I would put my money on Apple Slate if anything.

Anyway, been sitting back for the last few weeks listening and felt like putting in my 2cents.

January 05 2010 at 12:32 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Julien

«It's time to start designing for a one-hand-to-hold-and-one-hand-to-manipulate reality»

There surely will be difference in manipulation and gameplay.

One thing I re-confirmed last summer, is that tablet-mode gameplay allows for easy collaboration -- even if the game wasn't planned that way.

You can really imagine the tablet sitting on a table, and 2 or 3 persons interacting on it. An iPhone game like Knots would make perfect sense on a bigger tablet.


So, what to do if you want to prepare in advance and explore tablet gameplay?

Your best bet at the moment is to get an existing small tabletPC and load some casual flash game.

Hand it to friends and kids, and note what works, and what doesn't.

As you can see in this post and youtube video, this simple user testing setup will really give you some sense of what to expect :
http://ils.sont.la/post/kids-love-mac-tablet-user-testing-a-rumor

January 05 2010 at 9:20 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
dagamer43

Tablet apps need to be separate. Simply converting an iPhone app into an iSlate app makes little sense since when you have so many extra pixels, they're hardly the same app graphically anymore.

January 04 2010 at 9:58 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Rick

Two things spring to my mind when reading this post:

For years I've been preaching and practicing the ethos of creating base graphics (if not the entire design) as vectors, and optimizing for sizes smaller than 64px. This is simply good practice for many reasons, such as when you need to provide graphics suitable for print, and even for performing sub-pixel trickery when optimizing pixel-accurate icons for small sizes.

Secondly, this is a lot of concern over minutiae that should be secondary to app design. Let me frame it this way: when Apple announced the OSX-based iPhone, did traditional OS X developers huff and puff that they'd have to scale down their app layouts and icons down to the small screen size? No. People forget that in addition to the SDK, Apple also did the hard work of developing the design language and UI patterns that are replicated in nearly every iPhone app, which is as important as the iPhone SDK itself.

So since it's almost a certainty that Apple will want to bank on the healthy (and profitable) iPhone developer ecosystem to prop up their new product category, it's equally certain that they would not accept upscaled versions of the same exact iPhone UI layouts from developers. They will create and optimize the interaction design to be suitable for the form factor, and will guide developers on how to make the transition properly.

January 04 2010 at 9:28 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
mike_sloper

The tablet won't be a big iPhone. There will be a different store containing magazine-style 'apps' that are developed by third parties using Apple's tools and store. A 'magazine' publisher will appear in the iLife suite for amateur publishers. The publishers keep 70% of the revenue if they charge anything. It will be a revolution in print as every big name rushes to populate the store. It won't be made for games; Apple has never been interested in them. It will not simply duplicate the iPhone on a bigger screen; Apple want you to buy both machines, not one or the other. What Apple has learned from the App Store is that people will pay for what are essentially just the next evolution in web pages, but without the browser. A big name publisher will appear at the keynote and everyone will rush to have their magazine or book in Apple's store.

January 04 2010 at 7:36 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
2 replies to mike_sloper's comment
Julien

Mike, Steve Jobs clearly stated that Apple is positioning iPod Touch as a gaming platform...

mike_sloper said: «It won't be made for games; Apple has never been interested in them.»

January 05 2010 at 9:03 AM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
mike_sloper

I realise the iPod Touch is now marketed as such, but I don't believe Apple set out to make it a gaming device. This an interesting article which rings true for me: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/11/06/doom_game_creator_suggests_apple_embarrassed_about_iphone_gaming.html

January 05 2010 at 12:22 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Erica Sadun

Strictly speaking it's a second generation unit. The iPhone releases were 1st generation 2G iPhone (1,1), 3G iPhone with minor upgrades (1,2) and 3GS (2,1)

January 04 2010 at 5:56 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1 reply to Erica Sadun's comment
1337MacUser

Touché.

January 04 2010 at 6:44 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
1337MacUser

I find it kind of amusig that the article said the iPhone is in it's second generation when in reality, it is in it's third. iPhone- iPhone 3G - iPhone 3G[S]

January 04 2010 at 5:53 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
ChriB

Wow, this ResKit works like a charm! My app (currently in progress) works perfectly (well I had to calculate the appropriate minimumFontSize...) on any resolution because it uses [UIScreen mainScreen].bounds and draws everything itself instead of using images (CGContext stuff). ResKit rocks!

January 04 2010 at 5:29 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Mike

I'd be shocked for Apple to go anything but ARM considering the NatSemi buy.

January 04 2010 at 5:10 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
usingpond

I'm glad SOMEONE finally addressed this huge gap in logic (iPhone apps running on the iSlate) that literally every Apple blogger has made. Christ.

January 04 2010 at 5:10 PM Report abuse rate up rate down Reply
Buy an ad here

Hot Apps on TUAW

Tweets

© 2012 AOL Inc. All Rights Reserved.