# The iPhone 4, what's the big deal?



## mac91 (Feb 18, 2010)

I'm honestly, not convinced that the iPhone 4 is _THAT _amazing. The UI looks almost the same... the same boring grid pattern.
Sure, the exterior hardware looks new, slick, and cool... but with time, that can get old. Because a cooler, sleeker phone will show up.

So seriously, what's the big deal about? When I was convinced that the iPhone 3g/gs was a cool phone, it was already at the end of it's life cycle.
I had planned to go for the iPhone 4, but I'm not nearly as impressed as I thought I would be.

The new front facing camera, aluminum body, and thinner phone are all cool.
But software wise, it looks pretty similar to the older models.


----------



## daniels (Jul 27, 2009)

well if you don't like it don't buy it. I personally find that the iphone 4 something new. The flash camera and quality is what sold me to get the iphone 4.


----------



## mac91 (Feb 18, 2010)

daniels said:


> well if you don't like it don't buy it. I personally find that the iphone 4 something new. The flash camera and quality is what sold me to get the iphone 4.


It's not that I don't like it. It's just that I don't get what the big deal is about? Apple is great, they make phenomenal products...
But the camera and the flash... many other phones have that. 

I just don't understand, perhaps this is hype?


----------



## mkolesa (Jul 22, 2008)

to each their own, here's the nytimes report:
New iPhone 4 Adds a Camera for Video Chats - NYTimes.com
if you'll notice, there's this quote:
“When it ships, it will be the best smartphone on the market,” said Tim Bajarin, an analyst with Creative Strategies, who has been following Apple for nearly three decades. “It gives Apple a year’s lead on competitors, if not more.”
so, if a major analyst thinks it's at least a year ahead of the competition, it makes me wonder what you're comparing it against.


----------



## MacUnited (Nov 1, 2009)

hehe.. how spoiled can we get! I bought a JVC HD camcorder a year ago for 600 dollars, 2 months later, it dropped to 250 or something, you have a phone that will take HD movies and gives you the ability to edit and share them with whoever you wish, with all the other "regular" features, The new front facing camera, the aluminum body, and thinner phone are all cool, and we still look for the next big thing


----------



## satchmo (May 26, 2005)

Not everyone will share the same enthusiasm for every product. Some want specs, some are turned on by customization. 
I love it because of design and the fact that it just works. Not everything, but more so than any other phone OS. Apple usually 'gets it' when it comes to usability. 

I suggest you wait until it's available and then go into a store and try one out.
Pictures and specs rarely do Apple products justice. 
If you still don't see the 'big deal', walk away.


----------



## spiffychristian (Mar 17, 2008)

.


----------



## KMPhotos (Jun 17, 2008)

What sold me is the HD video recording, the iMovie app, and the new camera with flash. 
But don't feel bad if you don't think the iPhone 4 is amazing. Like others have said, to each their own. Not everyone has to love everything Apple makes -- oh wait, yes we do, I think it's part of cell phone contracts.


----------



## ldphoto (Jul 9, 2009)

There are a few features that definitely are an upgrade from the 3GS: 

-battery life is much improved
-display resolution is much better and will improve readability
-supports higher speed HSPA and also more frequency bands.
-faster processor
-noise-cancelling microphone
-gyroscope could be useful (I'm thinking dead reckoning for GPS in tunnels, etc.)

Other new features are rather pointless to me: 

-5MP camera is still not good enough to use for photos to print, and the current 2 or 3MP camera is plenty for facebook-type pictures.
-Video camera is useless without optical zoom, in my opinion
-I can't see the front camera as being very useful until FaceTime works on cellular
-Still limited to 32GB? I would have considered upgrading if a 64GB model was offered. Sticking with 32GB makes it less appealing.

Most of the other cool features are really part of iOS 4.0, which will work fairly well on the 3GS. For me, I'll have to see the display. If it's phenomenally better than the 3GS, I may choose to upgrade, but the other features will probably not be enough to convince me. Granted, at some point, new apps will start to require the new hardware, and I'll probably move up then. Hopefully at that point, we'll have a 64GB iPhone 4.


----------



## imobile (Oct 6, 2007)

*So what?*



mac91 said:


> I'm honestly, not convinced that the iPhone 4 is _THAT _amazing. The UI looks almost the same... the same boring grid pattern.
> Sure, the exterior hardware looks new, slick, and cool... but with time, that can get old. Because a cooler, sleeker phone will show up.
> 
> So seriously, what's the big deal about? When I was convinced that the iPhone 3g/gs was a cool phone, it was already at the end of it's life cycle.
> ...



The software ~ it just works?
What is this end of life cycle nonsense. 
Do you want the phone to wipe your derriere?


----------



## Ekasra (Oct 3, 2008)

As someone who considers his iPhone as one of his primary gaming devices, the added speed upgrade over my 3G and higher resolution screen is reason enough to be excited. I think I just about squealed when Farmville was announced during the keynote. Multitasking and in-app SMS are also features in iOS4 that I'm excited for.


----------



## KMPhotos (Jun 17, 2008)

ldphoto said:


> Other new features are rather pointless to me:
> 
> -5MP camera is still not good enough to use for photos to print, and the current 2 or 3MP camera is plenty for facebook-type pictures.


As a photographer I've printed several of my pictures from my 3GS up to 8x10 with no real problem. So while I understand more MP's really means nothing (my original Canon 1d 4MP camera still produces better pictures than the new 12+ MP point and shoots), the iPhone camera is more than capable of taking pictures that can be printed.


----------



## thadley (Jul 8, 2008)

I'm mostly with you on this. The front facing camera is cool, but until you get widespread adoption it's not really a huge feature. 

Really since the introduction of the 3G everything seems to be iterative. The 3GS did video and was faster, that was really it. The 4 does better video and...really, that's it. It'll be faster, and the screen resolution is way better, but that's it.

But what else can you really do? I suppose the camera could be better, maybe it could have the ability to set up a local wifi hotspot. But we're starting to run out of features we'd even want on a phone. 

Really, it's not a huge step up. But it's a bigger step than the iPhone 3GS was. And I actually like that Apple has been moving in this manner. They don't tend to jump ahead and have big problems, they move the dial slowly and have come out with arguably the best smart phone on the market. So yeah. It's not that big a deal. And I don't even think Apple's trying to say it's this huge step up from the 3GS. But it's a step forward in the smartphone market in general.

I'll be getting it. The HD video and better screen is enough for me. Doubt I'll use FaceTime much, but we'll see. I can easily see this replacing my Point & Shoot camera completely.


----------



## daniels (Jul 27, 2009)

if they take huge step then what would be the point of updating the iphone's each year? he's adding some new features at each update but not huge steps forward or else he'd be out of ideas.


----------



## i-rui (Sep 13, 2006)

mac91 said:


> The UI looks almost the same... the same boring grid pattern.


why on earth would they even think of changing the UI? I'd say 90% of why the iphone/ipod touch/ipad are so successful is because of the UI.


----------



## kevleviathan (Apr 9, 2008)

ldphoto said:


> 5MP camera is still not good enough to use for photos to print, and the current 2 or 3MP camera is plenty for facebook-type pictures.


Rubbish! Even my ancient 2MP Fujifilm camera produced great prints at 4x6. 5MP is enough for a nice looking 8x10 assuming the lens/sensor is halfway decent.


----------



## chos3n (Jun 10, 2010)

Well, here is what I think.

I mean the video chat is really awesome, it a nice step forward in technology. But, I personally text more than I call people. I am sure that I'm not the only one. So, I text my friend because it's faster. But now, is there going to be a lot of people doing video call ? I mean I bought a webcam and I thought it was really cool (the Logitech Messenger back in the days). I used it 3 times.

But for buinessman and people travelling away, it's a must. I would love to talk to my girlfriend even though I'm in Chicago and she's in Montreal.


----------



## Blaizng angel (May 3, 2010)

thadley said:


> I'm mostly with you on this. The front facing camera is cool, but until you get widespread adoption it's not really a huge feature.
> 
> Really since the introduction of the 3G everything seems to be iterative. The 3GS did video and was faster, that was really it. The 4 does better video and...really, that's it. It'll be faster, and the screen resolution is way better, but that's it.
> 
> ...


WAIT: after jailbreak:

1) i can use a high quality camera via cydia that allows me to record falwless videos (cycorder)

2) I can set up wi fi hotspots via a app that was rejected from the appstore: 
mywi

3) a lot fo other "unfeasable" things

4) multitasking via backgrounder/circuitous
ON MA 3g. Even have voice control


for me, i just use it primarily as ipod and phone, so upgrade not essetnial


----------



## Rounder (Aug 9, 2008)

chos3n said:


> Well, here is what I think.
> 
> I mean the video chat is really awesome, it a nice step forward in technology. But, I personally text more than I call people. I am sure that I'm not the only one. So, I text my friend because it's faster. But now, is there going to be a lot of people doing video call ? I mean I bought a webcam and I thought it was really cool (the Logitech Messenger back in the days). I used it 3 times.
> 
> But for buinessman and people travelling away, it's a must. I would love to talk to my girlfriend even though I'm in Chicago and she's in Montreal.


Facetime does seem really cool. And will be even better once that iPhone 4 is jailbroken and force apps to run over 3G. Meaning Facetime anywhere!


----------



## Blaizng angel (May 3, 2010)

Rounder said:


> Facetime does seem really cool. And will be even better once that iPhone 4 is jailbroken and force apps to run over 3G. Meaning Facetime anywhere!


Also meaning DATA BILL $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$XX)


----------



## hayesk (Mar 5, 2000)

ldphoto said:


> -5MP camera is still not good enough to use for photos to print, and the current 2 or 3MP camera is plenty for facebook-type pictures.


Ha ha ha! That's a joke, right? 5MP is plenty big enough to print 8x10s. Also worth noting is Steve said in the keynote that the actual size of each pixel sensor is the same size as the old one, meaning the overall sensor is larger, implying better image quality. We'll have to wait and see of course, but the camera should be quite good.


----------



## hayesk (Mar 5, 2000)

Blaizng angel said:


> Also meaning DATA BILL $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$XX)


Given that I use maybe 20MB of my 6GB in a month, that shouldn't be a problem. But I wish it would work with iChat. Most people I chat with now will not have an iPhone 4. 

Hopefully the AIM client will be updated to support video chat.


----------



## kkritsilas (Mar 1, 2010)

hayesk said:


> Ha ha ha! That's a joke, right? 5MP is plenty big enough to print 8x10s. Also worth noting is Steve said in the keynote that the actual size of each pixel sensor is the same size as the old one, meaning the overall sensor is larger, implying better image quality. We'll have to wait and see of course, but the camera should be quite good.


Really depends on where you are coming from. A 35mm film negative/slide, at full resolution has about 74MP equivalent, at with 24 bit-32 bit color. A 4 X 6 print, made from a printer, has no possibility of showing this, and a 5MP image capture would pretty much look the same. A 4X6, with a good darkroom/enlarger setup, would look about the same or very slightly better. At 8 X10, it is quite possible to see a difference. Sort of depends on how good your eyesight is, and what standard you are judging against.

A 6 X 7 cm (Medium Format) negative is about 324 MP, and will look noticeably better at 8 X10 than a 5MP image capture, and even better than a 12 MP image capture. 

Kostas


----------



## okcomputer (Jul 18, 2005)

kkritsilas said:


> Really depends on where you are coming from. A 35mm film negative/slide, at full resolution has about 74MP equivalent, at with 24 bit-32 bit color. A 4 X 6 print, made from a printer, has no possibility of showing this, and a 5MP image capture would pretty much look the same. A 4X6, with a good darkroom/enlarger setup, would look about the same or very slightly better. At 8 X10, it is quite possible to see a difference. Sort of depends on how good your eyesight is, and what standard you are judging against.
> 
> A 6 X 7 cm (Medium Format) negative is about 324 MP, and will look noticeably better at 8 X10 than a 5MP image capture, and even better than a 12 MP image capture.
> 
> Kostas


That's a lot of info, but it really has nothing to do with the posts above. We all know that film has a high resolution. That has nothing to do with prints, except that film obviously makes nice prints.

What is being discussed here is whether or not the 5mp camera in the new iPhone will be good, and if it will be sufficient enough for printing 4x6 and 8x10 prints.

As mentioned, the sensor itself is just as important as how many mp's there are. The general consensus is that the photos will be plenty good enough for 4x6, and most likely good for 8x10's as well, depending on the photo.

The camera in the 3GS can take photos that look decent at 8x10 as well, again depending on the situation. Also, 8x10s are normally hung on a wall, and thus are not looked at from several inches away, so mp's are once again not as important.


----------



## kkritsilas (Mar 1, 2010)

Like I said, depends on where you are coming from. For you, a 8 X 10 from a 5MP sensor is acceptable; for me, it isn't. It would be acceptable for a 4 X 6. For an 8 X 10, I would like at least 12MP, from a modern sensor. To go beyond that, I wouldn't find anything less than the current Canon or Nikon full frame sensors, which are all 20MP+ (except for the D700). 

When you are used to seeing 8 X10 prints made from medium format negatives, the limitations on 5MP sensors for the same sized print are pretty obvious. Your acceptable, or a generally accepted consensus, may not be acceptable to all (including me).

the 5MP sensor in the iPhone 4 is an improvement. But there is only so much you can do with a sensor that is only a few square mm in size. Same with a very small lens. This will be a good camera for facebook, or for emailing pictures around (although how the pictures end up looking on the Retina display will be telling), but it is not, for me, a substitute for a real camera.

Kostas


----------



## okcomputer (Jul 18, 2005)

kkritsilas said:


> For an 8 X 10, I would like at least 12MP, from a modern sensor


I can assure you, I have photos on my wall printed at 8x10 and 11x14 and 16x20, taken by a compact Canon, and Rebel XT, XTi, and XS cameras (5mp, 8mp, 10mp, 10mp) that you would find "acceptable."

The Megapixel Myth


Also, I never said the sensor was high quality - I understand its limitations due to its construction and size. But to say it cannot create image that are acceptable to you is a bit silly seeing as how no one has seen images from the iPhone 4 yet. Under certain conditions, I'm willing to bet it can create images that you'd find acceptable at 4x6, 5x7, and maybe even 8x10.


Lastly, in regards to this comment:



> This will be a good camera for facebook, or for emailing pictures around (although how the pictures end up looking on the Retina display will be telling), but it is not, for me, a substitute for a real camera.


It's not about the camera. It's not about the tech. It's about the photographer, the framing, and the light. Obviously we all want to use full-frame dSLRs to get the best image quality. But there have been awe-inspiring, jaw-dropping, award-winning photos taken with everything from Polaroids to disposable cameras to point-and-shoot Canons, to yes, even cell phones.


----------



## VNJ85 (Feb 24, 2006)

double post... srry.


----------



## VNJ85 (Feb 24, 2006)

I am in the "not impressed" camp.

Realistically I don't believe everyone video records and takes photos during their average day to day enough that it is significant improvement for peoples everyday lives. While I applaud having the High-deff capabilities and I can see how EVERYONE who has the iPhone4 will certainly make good use of it. I don't believe it as revolutionary. 

I feel like these video/photo features are being blown out of proportion. Sort of like a way to cover up the fact they haven't really been able to make great strides for development in the last year. I don't blame them, we expect new things every year, but the reality is that it sometimes takes years to perfect a technology ready for the public use.

Things that I would have expected by now;
1. A BBM like program.
2. true multi-process capability.. (albeit I understand why they have limited this)
3. an external LED indicator for mssgs/txts (I know, a steal from the blackberry).

I know mostly all idea's from the blackberry... but the truth is Apple pretty much nailed most things that make a good phone a really good phone, the only things they left out are what RIM still has.


----------



## kkritsilas (Mar 1, 2010)

Let us agree to disagree on this. For example, the listed article notes:

"One needs at least a doubling of linear resolution or film size to make an obvious improvement. This is the same as quadrupling the megapixels. A simple doubling of megapixels, even if all else remained the same, is very subtle. The factors that matter, like color and sharpening algorithms, are far more significant."

So, the 3 MP camera on the 3GS and the 5 MP camera on the 4 should not really deliver any significant improvement, and then why the big hype over the 5MP camera. Indirectly, it also brings up my point of the 12MP image being significantly better than the 5MP of the 4's camera.

As for technique, composition, and photographer's vision, that is not going to change whether you use a iPhone, a 5D Mark II, or a 16 X 20 View Camera. People here were discussing resolution of the new 4's camera, and its suitability for 4X6 and 8X10 prints. I still don't believe that it is suitable for 8X10s. If 5MP were all that was required, with no visible improvements past that, pros wouldn't be running out and getting 1DS Mark IIIs and Nikon D3s for the privilege of shelling out $5-8K. Resolution, color rendition, and technique all count. But when the chips are down, and your income depends on the best possible image quality, pros get the 20+MP cameras.

I don't think I have any more to say on this.

Kostas


----------



## hayesk (Mar 5, 2000)

kkritsilas said:


> Like I said, depends on where you are coming from. For you, a 8 X 10 from a 5MP sensor is acceptable; for me, it isn't. It would be acceptable for a 4 X 6. For an 8 X 10, I would like at least 12MP, from a modern sensor. To go beyond that, I wouldn't find anything less than the current Canon or Nikon full frame sensors, which are all 20MP+ (except for the D700).


And the D3s. But you haven't made your point objectively. You've just stated "I can see the difference" over and over. We simply don't believe you. What we do believe is the pro sensors have lower noise, better colour, better dynamic range, etc. Nobody is saying you can't make better images with pro sensors, but at 8x10, a pro 5MP sensor (if you can still find one), will produce an 8x10, when hung at a wall and looked at from a typical viewing distance, will be indistinguishable from one made from a 12MP or higher.


> When you are used to seeing 8 X10 prints made from medium format negatives, the limitations on 5MP sensors for the same sized print are pretty obvious. Your acceptable, or a generally accepted consensus, may not be acceptable to all (including me).


Yes, and I'll bet you inspect them up close, maybe with a loupe, but we're talking hanging on a wall, or 4x6s in hand here. We're not talking about scrutinizing by professionals.


----------



## hayesk (Mar 5, 2000)

VNJ85 said:


> I am in the "not impressed" camp.
> 
> Realistically I don't believe everyone video records and takes photos during their average day to day enough that it is significant improvement for peoples everyday lives.


That's not the point. The point of a camera phone is it's there when you need it. As the adage goes, "The best camera is the one you have with you." So, why not improve the quality of the one you always have with you.



> I feel like these video/photo features are being blown out of proportion. Sort of like a way to cover up the fact they haven't really been able to make great strides for development in the last year. I don't blame them, we expect new things every year, but the reality is that it sometimes takes years to perfect a technology ready for the public use.


Agreed.


> Things that I would have expected by now;
> 1. A BBM like program.


I'm not sure why. Apple's not just going to copy BlackBerry - and I'll bet RIM has lots of patents to prevent this. What I don't understand is why RIM hasn't done anything on the iPhone yet. But that's a RIM expectation, not Apple.


> 2. true multi-process capability.. (albeit I understand why they have limited this)


If you did understand, then this wouldn't be in your list. It's not going to happen. Real multitasking requires more power, more RAM, more storage (you need Virtual Memory). It's wholly unsuitable to a phone with today's technology.


> 3. an external LED indicator for mssgs/txts (I know, a steal from the blackberry).
> 
> I know mostly all idea's from the blackberry... but the truth is Apple pretty much nailed most things that make a good phone a really good phone, the only things they left out are what RIM still has.


Sounds like you should purchase a Blackberry.


----------



## techgirl (May 14, 2010)

VNJ85 said:


> I am in the "not impressed" camp.
> 
> ...
> 
> ...


I have really missed the message indicator that the bb had - had my iphone 2 years, love it, but still wish I could see when it's on the table at a meeting if there are any messages without needing to turn it on.


----------



## hayesk (Mar 5, 2000)

kkritsilas said:


> So, the 3 MP camera on the 3GS and the 5 MP camera on the 4 should not really deliver any significant improvement, and then why the big hype over the 5MP camera. Indirectly, it also brings up my point of the 12MP image being significantly better than the 5MP of the 4's camera.


Steve Jobs said the sensor was larger - the individual pixel sensors are the same size.


> If 5MP were all that was required, with no visible improvements past that, pros wouldn't be running out and getting 1DS Mark IIIs and Nikon D3s for the privilege of shelling out $5-8K. Resolution, color rendition, and technique all count. But when the chips are down, and your income depends on the best possible image quality, pros get the 20+MP cameras.



You made the assumption that pros don't get caught up in megapixel marketing; they do. Manufacturers respond accordingly too, often because of the public's belief in the MP Myth. When I bought my D40 with 6MP, my friend said to me, well my camera (cheap point and shoot) has 8MP, ha ha. It's a very real perception that unfortunately, does carry into the pro world.
You made the assertion that pros use 20+MP cameras. False. The overwhelming positive reviews and sales (to pros) of the Nikon D3s (has a 12MP sensor) says to me that 20+MP is in no way a prerequisite to shooting pro. Yes, so pros get 20+ MP cameras, but not all and not an overwhelming majority.
You also failed to acknowledge that many want more megapixels for cropping reasons.
Your entire argument is based on MPs with no regard to sensor quality.

There are lots of professionally printed photos that have been taken with 5MP pro bodies of a few years ago - and they look fantastic. The addition of MP, all else being equal) does not improve the image to the viewer. Nobody is claiming the iPhone4 is equivalent in image quality to a pro camera, just the assertion that 5MP is enough resolution to print 8x10. Nothing you have said disproves that.


----------



## okcomputer (Jul 18, 2005)

Thanks, hayesk... haha. 



kkritsilas said:


> I don't think I have any more to say on this.


Great. 



kkritsilas said:


> People here were discussing resolution of the new 4's camera, and its suitability for 4X6 and 8X10 prints. I still don't believe that it is suitable for 8X10s.


Yes, that is what they were discussing. Then you started discussing "pro" cameras and medium-format negatives, and then you said anything less than 12mp was not "acceptable" for 8x10s. And I stated I have 5,8, and 10mp images on my wall that I'm sure even you would find acceptable. And many great photographers have used (and continue to use) cameras that you would not consider pro cameras (point and shoots, lower-end Nikons and Canon's, etc.).

And you are still maintaining that a camera you have never used will not be sufficient for 8x10s. What hayesk and I are trying to say is that it very well could be sufficient for 8x10 prints, especially in certain conditions, and especially if that 8x10 is going to be on a wall being looked at from a few feet away.

You keep bringing up points about film, large sensors, and "pro" gear, but all of that has NOTHING to do with the discussion at hand. It's a moot point. As I stated earlier, everyone knows that higher mp cameras and film will produce better quality photographs. I'm not sure why you want to continue talking about those things. We get it. It's a bit condescending as well.

We're not going to looking at iPhone 4 photo prints with loupes. Nor are we going to be printing them on billboards.

The bottom line is that the technology has improved slightly, and it will be a nice camera to have on hand at all times, especially when you don't have your P&S or dSLR on you. It's not the only selling point of the camera, but it helps. I am impressed and welcome the change, especially the video aspect. Combined with all the other improvements, it's a worthwhile upgrade for me.

Can't wait to put some 8x10s on my wall...


----------



## VNJ85 (Feb 24, 2006)

techgirl said:


> I have really missed the message indicator that the bb had - had my iphone 2 years, love it, but still wish I could see when it's on the table at a meeting if there are any messages without needing to turn it on.


I am wondering if the iPhone screen has the capabilities to selectively use certain areas of its screen.. I know LCD's can, but I do't know about the iPhone.

I bet with the new iPhone4/iOS4 someone could make an app where a 1cmx1cm colored area can flash (or if a message/email is recieved. Basically using the iPhone screen to be the LED message indicator. the whole screen black except for a small spot acting like an LED)


----------



## sheamus (May 20, 2010)

I don't think you can selectively turn on part of a screen. So even if you are only changing a few pixels, you are still consuming a fair bit of power.

I too am coming off BB. I am not sure if I will miss the indicator light. I am hoping that I am less obsessive about it without. I am constantly glancing at phone to see if indicator is flashing. Based on color of indicator I can even tell who is message is from. So I don't think I will miss this...

BBM, I will miss. I really thought apple would put iChat on the phone to use with ff-camera, instead of inventing FaceTime...

Having said all that, I am in the impressed camp with iOS4. The screen is beutiful, and people rave about the speed of the iPad, so having that power in a phone will be great. I find I never edit video when I shoot it, even though I have iMovie on my mac. But the fact that I can edit video on my phone while waiting for a meeting is great. And... well... the real reason I am leaving BB is games, and the new phone will support better looking games.

~S


----------



## kkritsilas (Mar 1, 2010)

Does anybody think the addition of the gyroscope will be significant for games? I don't know if the gyroscope in the iPhone 4 can measure rates of position change or not, but if it can't, why is this any different from what the accelerometers can do (I realize that the gyroscope is 3 axis, but one of the axis is fairly useless (the axis that would point the top or side of the phone towards or away from you, it makes it harder to see the phone's screen))?

Kostas


----------



## jakey (Jul 8, 2008)

kkritsilas said:


> Does anybody think the addition of the gyroscope will be significant for games?


I just want that Jenga game.


----------



## sheamus (May 20, 2010)

What it's like to own an Apple product - The Oatmeal


----------

