John Gruber, elaborating on the previously linked 9to5Mac report:

First, at 1136 × 640, you get a diagonal of 1,303.877 pixels after applying the Pythagorean theorem. There are no such thing as fractional pixels, but what I’m talking about here are pixels as a unit of length, equal to 1/326 inch. Divide 1,303.877 by 326 and you get 3.9996 inches. Boom, a “4-inch” display.

If Apple does indeed change the screen — which is looking increasingly likely — this thing is going to make the last few iPhone launches look very meek. There will be none in the “but it looks the same as the last one” camp. Everyone will want to upgrade.

And if they add LTE as well…

A guy named Nelson stole Katy McCaffrey’s iPhone. Little did he realize his photos would end up in her Photo Stream. Or that she would post them all to Facebook…

Gotta love technology.

At least it looks like Nelson had a wild night on the USS Dumbass.

(via Ryan Vance)

It’s just too bad “the Japanese hate the iPhone”. They just hate it so much.

(Did I beat Gruber to the joke?)

Vic Gundotra:

To be clear, we’re not interested in a mobile or social experience that’s just smaller. We’re embracing the sensor-rich smartphone (with its touchable screen and high-density display), and transforming Google+ into something more intimate, and more expressive. Today’s new iPhone app is an important step in this direction—toward a simpler, more beautiful Google.

Alongside all my criticism of Google+, I’ve long held the belief that Google should have gone all-in on mobile for the product. The desktop/web social game is over. Mobile is different. And it’s still being decided. BUT, as Gundotra says, it can’t just be a shrunken-down port of your desktop experience.

Looking forward to trying this update out — and pleasantly surprised that Google went iPhone-first with it. Again, if you want to win this game, focusing solely on Android — even if you happent to control that platform — is not an option.

John Gruber thinking out loud about John Battelle’s assertion that Apple could cut the company off by restricting necessary iOS remote access:

But I think the way Apple could most hurt Pebble is not by changing the SDK, but by releasing its own linked-to-your-iPhone wristwatch gadget. (Imagine, say, an iPod Nano with Pebble-like features and a LunaTik-style strap.)

At first, it’s sort of strange to think about how many of the huge tech-related Kickstarter projects have revolved around watches and iOS devices in some way. (Remember that LunaTik started with Kickstarter at first also.) But actually, it’s not that strange at all. 

These successes say that there’s clearly a big demand for something along these lines. Add to the equation products like the Jawbone Up and the Nike FuelBand and things start to get really interesting.

Will Apple make a wrist device? I don’t know. But they should at the very least be thinking about it.

All I know is that at least 50 times a day I reach in my pocket to see why my phone just buzzed. A new email? A DM? An iMessage? Some sports score alert? Instagram? Path? Facebook? Foursquare?

I reach into my pocket, pull out my iPhone, turn on the screen, see the notification, then turn off the screen, then put the phone back in my pocket. 

Imagine if I could just look at my wrist? 

Pebble gets us close to this dream (which is why I bought one and you should too), but not fully there. Maybe Apple opens up new device APIs, or maybe they build that new device themselves. I’d be fine with either.

Two things:

1) Benedict Cumberbatch landed his role in the upcoming Star Trek sequel by shooting his audition on his iPhone in a friend’s kitchen on Christmas night and emailing it to J.J. Abrams.

2) Sherlock starts again in the U.S. on May 6 on PBS.

Citing the fact that the iPhone now accounts for just about 60% of smartphone sales at the top three U.S. carriers, easily besting all of the Android phones out there combined, Jay Yarow writes:

This very well could be the beginning of the end for Google’s mobile operating system.

In September 2010, I wrote “Is Android Surging Only Because Apple Is Letting It?” I followed this up in June 2011 with “The Verizon iPhone Halted Android’s Surge. The iPhone 5 Could Reverse It.”

Both posts were extremely controversial when they were published. But looking back, they sure seem to be pretty spot-on (well, except for the iPhone 5 part, just sub the iPhone 4S in there). Android was “winning” in the U.S. market because the iPhone was only on one carrier, and not even the largest carrier.

This should not be controversial now. It should be viewed as fact, as the numbers indicate. 

But in what may be a shock to some of you, I’m not nearly as bearish on Android right now as Yarow (and by extension, Raymond James analyst Tavis McCourt). I think Android will be fine because Apple will never fill every market need. 

Apple is smartly focused on China right now, which has a quickly maturing middle class. But I can’t see them competing with all those ultra-cheap phones that Android can enable — why would they? 

In the U.S., I think the iPhone will continue to dominate as the single most popular device for the foreseeable future, but Android as a whole will hang around as a popular alternative. 

Probably around late summer every year going forward, iPhone sales will dip ahead of the expected new device and some Android manufacturer will find a way to capitalize, rising the entire ecosystem’s share as a result. But it will always be short-lived. The new iPhone will come along and crush it. 

Remember too that the iPhone isn’t even on all four major U.S. carriers yet, something which T-Mobile clearly isn’t too happy about. Hard to see how that doesn’t change this year.