Who am I referring to? That’d be: Canalys principal analyst Pete Cunningham. As quoted by Christina Bonnington on Wired.com about the 3.5″ screen size of the iPhone:

>Cunningham said this was a “noticeable weakness” of the device. He expects the next iPhone will have a 4-inch or 4.3-inch display, rather than the 4.6-inch behemoth reported by Reuters. “I don’t think Apple can go much above 4.3 because of the need to meet so many different people’s needs,” Cunningham said. Unlike the 5.3-inch Samsung Galaxy Note, the iPhone is a mass-market device, and Apple will have to find the “sweet spot” for such a product.

Where’s the data to backup the assertion that the iPhone’s 3.5″ display is holding it back — [certainly the sales data doesn’t show that](http://www.asymco.com/2012/03/21/estimates-for-apples-second-fiscal-2012-quarter/). So if it is a “noticeable weakness” then I want to know why — what would change? Does Cunningham really think sales are being stunted because of the screen size?

And as for that “sweet spot” that he refers to, I think Apple has already found it. And the sales data *does* back me up on that one.

Posted by Ben Brooks