Yeah, this sounds more like supposition than rumour. "Some guy" can't get a screen, so ipso facto, Apple is cornering the screen market?
Also, LCD rumours aside, why would Apple go to multiple suppliers for the same product? When you buy a tablet, it's going to be a crap shoot whether you got the one with a a screen from company A, B, or C?
This makes little sense.
Although not ideal, it happens all the time in other industries (and in the computer industry). And if the alternative is massive shortages for months, you do what you gotta do.
Yeah, this sounds more like supposition than rumour. "Some guy" can't get a screen, so ipso facto, Apple is cornering the screen market?
Also, LCD rumours aside, why would Apple go to multiple suppliers for the same product? When you buy a tablet, it's going to be a crap shoot whether you got the one with a a screen from company A, B, or C?
This makes little sense.
maybe it's like RAM? there is a common standard where different companies pool their patents and everyone makes the same screens? I bet if you open up 1000 of the same model iMac's there will be some variety in parts
If it's going to be a serious e-book reader, it's going to have the ability to be read without the backlight.
Well OLED doesn't really fit that either. OLED is more like LED than eInk (or whatever they call the screen tech that MIT invented and the Kindle uses) from a visibility perspective, right?
The new tablet will have an LCD on one side, OLED on the other... Perfect for all situations, and cost over $3,000. Why buy one, when you can have two for twice the price?
The new tablet will have an LCD on one side, OLED on the other... Perfect for all situations, and cost over $3,000. Why buy one, when you can have two for twice the price?
Is it just me, or would an LCD on one side and eINK on the other, actually kind of be all things to all people. It probably got laughed out of an early design meeting since you enjoy both at once, but hey.
While the technology is superior, it is also costly. In November, one report suggested an OLED-based Apple tablet would cost between $1,500 and $1,700 to build based on current prices. It was then predicted an OLED tablet would cost about $2,000.
However, the still-unannounced Apple tablet is widely expected to have a final price of less than $1,000. Analyst Gene Munster with Piper Jaffray believes Apple could sell 1.4 million devices at an average selling price of $600.
In December, analyst Yair Reiner with Oppenheimer specifically disputed the claims of an OLED screen. He said checks within Apple's supply chain have said the device will use a 10.1-inch multi-touch display using LTPS LCD technology -- the same as on the iPhone. He expects an average selling price of $1,000.
Apple doesn't do inexpensive. If they can't generate sales through value-add, they don't bother with the products-- they're not going to introduce a new product whose sales drive is the price. Thus, any hope for a sub-$1000 model seems folly. They'll keep adding functionality until the price is $1000 or more rather than sell cheap.
Perhaps Apple needs all the displays because they've made a strategic decision to own the 10" mkt. They could be committed to selling these at very low or money losing margins so consumers buy tons of them?
Why would they do that?
The devices will need users to learn a powerful, but complex 'alphabet' of multi fingered (patented) gestures. If they can get the world to massively adopt the device, no one will be able to follow.
Why (again)? No one has the tech to follow for at least the next 3 years and Apple will advance the tech and the gizmos while the others play catch up.
Buying "them all" is a sure-fire way to keep the competition from bringing a similar device to market. I wonder if it's just a monopolistic move, since they've got the cash to buy "them all." Either that, or the report is a tad hyperbolic.
does ANYONE reading this know the native resolution of these 10.1" screens?
Its hard to be sure but when Cnet reviewed the Sony XEL-1 mentioned above they made the following comment which might be of interest "For whatever reason, perhaps related to manufacturing difficulties, Sony decided to give the XEL-1 just 960x540 pixels, exactly half of 1,920x1,080 (aka 1080p) on both the horizontal and vertical axes"
The Sony design is close to two years old though now so its seems likely the screen res has come up, and the ~$2000 price down, since then.
EDIT: Given the Sanyo/Epson comments that now appear above I think my post is fairly redundant.
Buying "them all" is a sure-fire way to keep the competition from bringing a similar device to market. I wonder if it's just a monopolistic move, since they've got the cash to buy "them all." ...
I think this unlikely given that Apple has simply never engaged in those kinds of practices before.
Also, these kinds of supply chain moves are always talked about (in many different industries), but few cases of such a thing actually happening exist AFAIK. I mean who's going to go to all the trouble to begin with, and how does the profit margin hold up when you are flushing billions down the drain trying to keep components away from your competitors?
In real life, stuff like that rarely (if ever) happens.
I think this unlikely given that Apple has simply never engaged in those kinds of practices before.
Also, these kinds of supply chain moves are always talked about (in many different industries), but few cases of such a thing actually happening exist AFAIK. I mean who's going to go to all the trouble to begin with, and how does the profit margin hold up when you are flushing billions down the drain trying to keep components away from your competitors?
In real life, stuff like that rarely (if ever) happens.
I'd agree with this assessment, for the very same reasons. I can't think of any examples lately or where a company has deliberately exhausted supplies at great expense to a competitor.
It tends to happen in property a little bit - like retaining or pre-securing a well located old supermarket location or a fast food site so a competitor can't get it - but usually it's not much more than a couple million dollars involved.
So they have (possibly) ordered LCD and OLED screens... 2 models? iSlate and iSlate Pro?
I can't see any way that Apple would go for OLED on the tablet. A few smaller marginal devices have used it so far but no way would Apple want to carry the can for OLED in their new flagship product.
If they did, it would be the first mainstream OLED screen most folks would experience, and the first time most of the media heads were talking about it etc. If there were any complaints about OLED technology, Apple would be forever joined at the hip to those complaints. Just like handwriting recognition and the Newton.
The fact that the recognition software was fixed very quickly and remains an excellent product today did nothing to stop Newton being known as "that computer with the broken hand-writing recognition" to this day.
Especially du to the price, if Apple is using OLED at all, it can only be for a "pro" level variation of the tablet, and I just don't believe that. Not only does it make little sense in general to have two tablets, it makes no sense that any one would pay a premium just for an OLED screen. They just aren't that good that it justifies it.
maybe it's like RAM? there is a common standard where different companies pool their patents and everyone makes the same screens? I bet if you open up 1000 of the same model iMac's there will be some variety in parts
Actually, no. I recently read an article about how the Army switched to Mac for their servers because Dell was switching parts mid-cycle. They said two Dells bought within one week of each other (same model) had a different chip on the motherboard. They said that kind of thing is unacceptable because they have to thoroughly test every single part. He said Macs keep high quality control and don't swap parts mid-cycle.
Comments
Yeah, this sounds more like supposition than rumour. "Some guy" can't get a screen, so ipso facto, Apple is cornering the screen market?
Also, LCD rumours aside, why would Apple go to multiple suppliers for the same product? When you buy a tablet, it's going to be a crap shoot whether you got the one with a a screen from company A, B, or C?
This makes little sense.
Although not ideal, it happens all the time in other industries (and in the computer industry). And if the alternative is massive shortages for months, you do what you gotta do.
Yeah, this sounds more like supposition than rumour. "Some guy" can't get a screen, so ipso facto, Apple is cornering the screen market?
Also, LCD rumours aside, why would Apple go to multiple suppliers for the same product? When you buy a tablet, it's going to be a crap shoot whether you got the one with a a screen from company A, B, or C?
This makes little sense.
maybe it's like RAM? there is a common standard where different companies pool their patents and everyone makes the same screens? I bet if you open up 1000 of the same model iMac's there will be some variety in parts
If it's going to be a serious e-book reader, it's going to have the ability to be read without the backlight.
Well OLED doesn't really fit that either. OLED is more like LED than eInk (or whatever they call the screen tech that MIT invented and the Kindle uses) from a visibility perspective, right?
The new tablet will have an LCD on one side, OLED on the other... Perfect for all situations, and cost over $3,000.
Is it just me, or would an LCD on one side and eINK on the other, actually kind of be all things to all people. It probably got laughed out of an early design meeting since you enjoy both at once, but hey.
While the technology is superior, it is also costly. In November, one report suggested an OLED-based Apple tablet would cost between $1,500 and $1,700 to build based on current prices. It was then predicted an OLED tablet would cost about $2,000.
However, the still-unannounced Apple tablet is widely expected to have a final price of less than $1,000. Analyst Gene Munster with Piper Jaffray believes Apple could sell 1.4 million devices at an average selling price of $600.
In December, analyst Yair Reiner with Oppenheimer specifically disputed the claims of an OLED screen. He said checks within Apple's supply chain have said the device will use a 10.1-inch multi-touch display using LTPS LCD technology -- the same as on the iPhone. He expects an average selling price of $1,000.
Apple doesn't do inexpensive. If they can't generate sales through value-add, they don't bother with the products-- they're not going to introduce a new product whose sales drive is the price. Thus, any hope for a sub-$1000 model seems folly. They'll keep adding functionality until the price is $1000 or more rather than sell cheap.
Why would they do that?
The devices will need users to learn a powerful, but complex 'alphabet' of multi fingered (patented) gestures. If they can get the world to massively adopt the device, no one will be able to follow.
Why (again)? No one has the tech to follow for at least the next 3 years and Apple will advance the tech and the gizmos while the others play catch up.
does ANYONE reading this know the native resolution of these 10.1" screens?
I'm guessing a minimum of 1080p. Sanyo/Epson already make a 7.1" 1080p LCD.
does ANYONE reading this know the native resolution of these 10.1" screens?
Its hard to be sure but when Cnet reviewed the Sony XEL-1 mentioned above they made the following comment which might be of interest "For whatever reason, perhaps related to manufacturing difficulties, Sony decided to give the XEL-1 just 960x540 pixels, exactly half of 1,920x1,080 (aka 1080p) on both the horizontal and vertical axes"
The Sony design is close to two years old though now so its seems likely the screen res has come up, and the ~$2000 price down, since then.
EDIT: Given the Sanyo/Epson comments that now appear above I think my post is fairly redundant.
Buying "them all" is a sure-fire way to keep the competition from bringing a similar device to market. I wonder if it's just a monopolistic move, since they've got the cash to buy "them all." ...
I think this unlikely given that Apple has simply never engaged in those kinds of practices before.
Also, these kinds of supply chain moves are always talked about (in many different industries), but few cases of such a thing actually happening exist AFAIK. I mean who's going to go to all the trouble to begin with, and how does the profit margin hold up when you are flushing billions down the drain trying to keep components away from your competitors?
In real life, stuff like that rarely (if ever) happens.
I think this unlikely given that Apple has simply never engaged in those kinds of practices before.
Also, these kinds of supply chain moves are always talked about (in many different industries), but few cases of such a thing actually happening exist AFAIK. I mean who's going to go to all the trouble to begin with, and how does the profit margin hold up when you are flushing billions down the drain trying to keep components away from your competitors?
In real life, stuff like that rarely (if ever) happens.
I'd agree with this assessment, for the very same reasons. I can't think of any examples lately or where a company has deliberately exhausted supplies at great expense to a competitor.
It tends to happen in property a little bit - like retaining or pre-securing a well located old supermarket location or a fast food site so a competitor can't get it - but usually it's not much more than a couple million dollars involved.
So they have (possibly) ordered LCD and OLED screens... 2 models? iSlate and iSlate Pro?
I can't see any way that Apple would go for OLED on the tablet. A few smaller marginal devices have used it so far but no way would Apple want to carry the can for OLED in their new flagship product.
If they did, it would be the first mainstream OLED screen most folks would experience, and the first time most of the media heads were talking about it etc. If there were any complaints about OLED technology, Apple would be forever joined at the hip to those complaints. Just like handwriting recognition and the Newton.
The fact that the recognition software was fixed very quickly and remains an excellent product today did nothing to stop Newton being known as "that computer with the broken hand-writing recognition" to this day.
Especially du to the price, if Apple is using OLED at all, it can only be for a "pro" level variation of the tablet, and I just don't believe that. Not only does it make little sense in general to have two tablets, it makes no sense that any one would pay a premium just for an OLED screen. They just aren't that good that it justifies it.
Finally, we have diodes produced without chemical fertilizers or pesticides.
maybe it's like RAM? there is a common standard where different companies pool their patents and everyone makes the same screens? I bet if you open up 1000 of the same model iMac's there will be some variety in parts
Actually, no. I recently read an article about how the Army switched to Mac for their servers because Dell was switching parts mid-cycle. They said two Dells bought within one week of each other (same model) had a different chip on the motherboard. They said that kind of thing is unacceptable because they have to thoroughly test every single part. He said Macs keep high quality control and don't swap parts mid-cycle.