So just some clarification on the 16:9 vs 3:2/true 4" thing;
iPhone 4/4S — 3.5 inch 3:2
960x640
329ppi, retina @ 10"
614,400 total pixels
iPhone "5" — 4 inch 16:9
1138x640
327ppi, retina @ 11"
728,320 total pixels
113,920 extra pixels in height
0,0 extra pixels in width
113,920 total extra pixels
iPhone X — 4 inch 3:2
1080x720
325ppi, retina @ 11"
777,600 total pixels
86,400 extra pixels in height
76,800 extra pixels in width
163,200 total extra pixels
http://f.cl.ly/items/361m2R3y3L3c3W2b1C2f/iPhone%20screen%20sizes.png[IMG] [URL="http://f.cl.ly/items/1o1d083b1u2y3w3C3T26/screens.png"][IMG]http://f.cl.ly/items/0E1K22091e1A1j340m0b/screens.png[MG][/URL]
iPhone X is what people are referring to when they say 'true' 4 inch iPhone. It'd have nearly 50k extra pixels (assuming similar ppi) than a 16:9 4incher, which is what we'll be getting with this new iPhone. Not to mention that the advantages of an elongated screen are a bit non-substantial in comparison, especially when you take into account the default orientation and how people actually use the device.
BUT, it is easier for Apple to produce, less complicated for iOS developers to adopt, and a generally simpler transition than a 3:2 4incher would've been... so there's that. All in all, it probably makes most sense.
Still, if you were planning on buying a non-iPhone due to a bigger screen size (like more and more consumers are these days), the new iPhone probably won't put a halt to those plans. A 'true' 4" might have.[/QUOTE]
You sure overlay the screens aligned to one corner and not the center. The differences are more apparent.