When Apple announced the imminent arrival of its new iPhone last week I have to say I was a little bit underwhelmed by some of the specs at first, especially the display which I thought might push up over 367 pixels per inch (ppi). However, having analysed the display specs and device availability of 842 smartphones, I concluded that Apple is still way ahead of its main rivals when you look at average PPI weighted by shelf share... but not in every measure.

Our recent report, Apple in Danger of Falling Behind in Pixel Density Race, details the 40 available smartphones identified as having a display with >300ppi, as well as showing the maximum, minimum and average PPI for every smartphone brand on the database. Try our SpecTRAX service now or existing SpecTRAX clients can access the database here.

What does shelf share mean? First, we take a snapshot of 300 network operators and retailers in 42 countries around the world and look at their smartphone portfolios. Then for each brand, we calculate the average PPI. Using Apple as an example; most carriers and retailers last week had at least one iPhone 4S variant on their portfolios (with a 326ppi spec), many also had one or more iPhone 4 (also 326ppi) device, and some had the older iPhone 3G S 8GB with a 163ppi display. 

We have calculated Apple’s PPI in September 2012 as the average of each model’s PPI weighted by the number of appearances of each model on the shelves. Apple’s weighted average in September was 306ppi, based on much wider availability of its 326ppi iPhone 4/4S models than the 163ppi iPhone 3G/3G S models.

Samsung, meanwhile, has a much wider portfolio of smartphone models, with variations in display size and resolution giving a September 2012 spread from 121ppi to 316ppi, and a weighted average of only 210.5ppi. Of the other top ten smartphone vendors, Sony’s average is the closest to Apple’s, although still a fair way behind at 272ppi. 

Apple won’t have everything its own way though, and one of the challenges that Apple will face in the near future is its 12 month cycle between new models. While the iPhone 4/4S/5 gradually push the 3G S out of the way and bring the average Apple display spec close to 326ppi, other smartphone vendors will push ahead with higher resolutions and even greater pixel densities. Sony’s Xperia S and Fujitsu’s Regza T-01D are already at 342ppi and Toshiba is expected to reveal a 367ppi display on a smartphone soon. Sony, Fujitsu, Pantech, Sharp, LG, Huawei and Motorola all have at least one flagship model available with a pixel density greater than Apple’s 326ppi, so where will that leave Apple in 12 months’ time? Probably still at the top in terms of average PPI, but almost certainly lagging behind in terms of maximum PPI.

- Stuart Robinson

42 new smartphones were announced at MWC (Mobile World Congress) 2012 and their specifications are examined in detail in this complimentary report HERE->

ZTE announced 13 models followed by Samsung and LG with 5 each.  The analysis was carried out using SpecTRAX.

The highlights of smartphones announced at MWC are:

• Android dominated with the introduction of Ice Cream Sandwich and the continued presence of Gingerbread. Microsoft’s Windows Phone OS 7 and 7.5 (Tango and Mango) were on 2 handsets, and Symbian Belle was found on Nokia’s 808 Pureview – more on p.7 of the report.
• The average display size of these new smartphones was over 4 inches; larger displays are power hungry so battery power was increased in response.
• Huawei’s powerful and impressive Ascend portfolio is equipped with “retina displays” and quad core processors – full details are on p.3 of the report.  Quad core processors gave calculated effective clock speeds of up to 4.5GHz which surpasses even some newly announced tablets.
• Nokia’s 808 Pureview fitted with a 41MP camera revolutionised smartphone photography – more on p.5.

If you want to try the SpecTRAX databse for yourself, just click HERE.

Stephen Entwistle

So, yesterday we finally got to hear what Apple's latest tablet offering is all about. The "New iPad", which worringly seems to be the actual name for the device, boasts an impressive display resolution, new processor, LTE, 5MP camera, 1GB of RAM and iOS 5, but how does it measure up to some other lower-profile announcements from the competition?

The iPad 3, as I'm going to call it (if Apple doesn't give it a proper name then people are going to come up with names of their own), is powered by an Apple "A5X" processor with a dual-core CPU and a quad-core GPU. This is in contrast to several other tablets that have been announced recently based on NVIDIA's quad-core Tegra 3. 

The resolution of the iPad 3's display (2048 x 1536 pixels) has doubled along each axis from the iPad 2, resulting in 4 times as many pixels and a pixel density of 264 pixels per inch (ppi). Apple is reffering to the iPad 3 as having a "Retina Display", a term it coined when it announced the 326ppi on the iPhone 4. I agree that the iPhone 4 and 4S can be referred to as Retina Displays because the pixel density is so high that the human eye cannot distinguish individual pixels. Research from various institutions has shown that level to be at about 300ppi and above. So, although the display resolution of the iPad 3 is excellent, I have a problem with Apple calling it a Retina Display. It is stretching the definition to meet their marketing needs, in the same way that several US carriers have called their HSPA+ networks 4G. 

As far as the other hardware specs are concerned, 4G network connectivity is the key one for me. The iPad 3 comes in several versions, some with Wi-fi only and some with Wi-fi plus 4G. The 4G speed is reported to be an impressive 73Mbps on AT&T and Verizon networks. While the A5X apps processor is Apple's own technology, the 4G modem chip is likely to be from Qualcomm as it also supports CDMA.

For more analysis from Strategy Analytics on the iPad 3 launch , check Peter King's report and Jia Wu's interview with New England Cable News.

One final thought: our SpecTRAX database reveals that the iPad 3 is the 508th tablet model to have been announced in the last two years. I wonder how many of the 507 other models have been profitable! 

And now the spec comparison...

Stuart Robinson