Apple just does not have the technology of many of the parts that go into its products, e.g displays, flash, batteries etc. Apple products just put together a bunch of parts from other manufacturers.
Sure, and many of the parts they do develop or codevelop (for example their Ax SoCs). They also do the hard work of developing their own software which few of their major hardware competitors do in any volume.
No where in my post did I state or imply Apple's IP is responsible for the displays.
Sorry, I thought that was the implication. Carry on then
So you think Apple pays for the development separate from the production, therefor allowing someone like LG to engineer it but Samsung to produce it? That would be an interesting way to approach exclusive use of that particular display. If Apple paid for the development there would be no argument over anyone else using it. Actually a good idea.
I have heard that Samsung are building a 11.6 inch screen with similar pixel density as iPad 3 for thier next tablet. At the moment it is just rumours though.
Not really a rumor. Samsung announced and demo'd it last fall. It's still 10.1 @ WQXGA (2560 x 1600)
Apple just does not have the technology of many of the parts that go into its products, e.g displays, flash, batteries etc. Apple products just put together a bunch of parts from other manufacturers.
They do appear to appear to engineer some of their own battery tech. As far as I know they were the first one to get 1000 cycles from a LIPoly batter, however, this could be similar to how they get new displays designed for their needs. I know of no acquisitions or patents specifically for battery tech.
Apple has recently bought a company for it's NAND flash IP so we can easily say Apple has some technology under its belt in that field.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy
Sorry, I thought that was the implication. Carry on then
So you think Apple pays for the development separate from the production, therefor allowing someone like LG to engineer it but Samsung to produce it? That would be an interesting way to approach exclusive use of that particular display. If Apple paid for the development there would be no argument over anyone else using it. Actually a good idea.
LG and Sharp failed to meet Apple's quality standards, leaving Samsung as the sole supplier of Retina displays for the new iPad, according to a new report.
Apple would be in BIG trouble if not for Samsung. Their quality can't be matched.
Apple needs to keep Samsung happy, or else Samsung might pull the plug.
Sorry, I thought that was the implication. Carry on then
So you think Apple pays for the development separate from the production, therefor allowing someone like LG to engineer it but Samsung to produce it? That would be an interesting way to approach exclusive use of that particular display. If Apple paid for the development there would be no argument over anyone else using it. Actually a good idea.
And not without precedent. Look at the situation with Corning and Gorilla Glass. Seems like a similar situation.
At 11.6" it's slightly below but all intents and purposes it's the same PPI. That would also have the appearance of having denser pixels because a laptop is likely to held farther away then a tablet.
That said, That article shows that their "demoed" 2560x1600 10.1" display was defective with many lines in the prototype. If you can't get a single model to an event to show off I have to think you are not close to being production ready.
That link also shows that the same resolution with PenTile is gearing up to be production ready but RB-GB isn't the same as RBG-RBG due to the 1/3 less sub-pixels.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ
And not without precedent. Look at the situation with Corning and Gorilla Glass. Seems like a similar situation.
Apple would be in BIG trouble if not for Samsung. Their quality can't be matched.
Apple needs to keep Samsung happy, or else Samsung might pull the plug.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techboy
So why are they suing each other again???
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz
Apple would be in deep shit if Samsung wasn't willing to help them out.
You guys/girls are taking the simplistic hand-wringing road here. May be beyond your intellect.
Apple is Samsung's biggest customer. I know it's a lot for you to grasp.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
They do appear to appear to engineer some of their own battery tech. As far as I know they were the first one to get 1000 cycles from a LIPoly batter, however, this could be similar to how they get new displays designed for their needs. I know of no acquisitions or patents specifically for battery tech.
Apple has recently bought a company for it's NAND flash IP so we can easily say Apple has some technology under its belt in that field.
Seems I read somewhere that LG originated some of the new display's tech, but here DisplaySearch says Sharp and one other originated the high-aperture part:
Another part of this story AI decided not to mention was that last year, Apple bought $7.8 Billion worth of stuff from Samsung but for 2012, Samsung forecasts that it will be more like $11 billion.
Apple would be up the creek without a paddle if it weren't for Samsung.
Apple would be in BIG trouble if not for Samsung. Their quality can't be matched.
Apple needs to keep Samsung happy, or else Samsung might pull the plug.
I disagree with the premise here. Apple needs to ensure that they pay Samsung for the work they do and pay on time. If not, Samsung might pull the plug. Otherwise, I doubt that Samsung would do something like that to a customer that pays as much as Apple does. And drives their quality as hard as Apple does. They get a double benefit. They get paid and they get process improvement.
At 11.6" it's slightly below but all intents and purposes it's the same PPI. That would also have the appearance of having denser pixels because a laptop is likely to held farther away then a tablet.
That said, That article shows that their "demoed" 2560x1600 10.1" display was defective with many lines in the prototype. If you can't get a single model to an event to show off I have to think you are not close to being production ready.
That article is from 5 months ago with one guy's opinion.
Quote:
That link also shows that the same resolution with PenTile is gearing up to be production ready but RB-GB isn't the same as RBG-RBG due to the 1/3 less sub-pixels.
Samsung is supposed to moving their entire S-AMOLED production to RBG-RBG some time this year but of course remains to be seen.
You guys/girls are taking the simplistic hand-wringing road here. May be beyond your intellect.
Apple is Samsung's biggest customer. I know it's a lot for you to grasp.
Seems I read somewhere that LG originated some of the new display's tech, but here DisplaySearch says Sharp and one other originated the high-aperture part:
Comments
Not sure what your point is.. Apple hasn't invented anything either. Apple is a marketing company.
Brilliant¡
Apple just does not have the technology of many of the parts that go into its products, e.g displays, flash, batteries etc. Apple products just put together a bunch of parts from other manufacturers.
Sure, and many of the parts they do develop or codevelop (for example their Ax SoCs). They also do the hard work of developing their own software which few of their major hardware competitors do in any volume.
No where in my post did I state or imply Apple's IP is responsible for the displays.
Sorry, I thought that was the implication. Carry on then
So you think Apple pays for the development separate from the production, therefor allowing someone like LG to engineer it but Samsung to produce it? That would be an interesting way to approach exclusive use of that particular display. If Apple paid for the development there would be no argument over anyone else using it. Actually a good idea.
I have heard that Samsung are building a 11.6 inch screen with similar pixel density as iPad 3 for thier next tablet. At the moment it is just rumours though.
Not really a rumor. Samsung announced and demo'd it last fall. It's still 10.1 @ WQXGA (2560 x 1600)
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english...111026/199826/
Apple just does not have the technology of many of the parts that go into its products, e.g displays, flash, batteries etc. Apple products just put together a bunch of parts from other manufacturers.
They do appear to appear to engineer some of their own battery tech. As far as I know they were the first one to get 1000 cycles from a LIPoly batter, however, this could be similar to how they get new displays designed for their needs. I know of no acquisitions or patents specifically for battery tech.
Apple has recently bought a company for it's NAND flash IP so we can easily say Apple has some technology under its belt in that field.
Sorry, I thought that was the implication. Carry on then
So you think Apple pays for the development separate from the production, therefor allowing someone like LG to engineer it but Samsung to produce it? That would be an interesting way to approach exclusive use of that particular display. If Apple paid for the development there would be no argument over anyone else using it. Actually a good idea.
Exhibit A: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._displays.html
Exhibit B: http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/20/l...s-nfc-variant/
LG and Sharp failed to meet Apple's quality standards, leaving Samsung as the sole supplier of Retina displays for the new iPad, according to a new report.
Apple would be in BIG trouble if not for Samsung. Their quality can't be matched.
Apple needs to keep Samsung happy, or else Samsung might pull the plug.
Sorry, I thought that was the implication. Carry on then
So you think Apple pays for the development separate from the production, therefor allowing someone like LG to engineer it but Samsung to produce it? That would be an interesting way to approach exclusive use of that particular display. If Apple paid for the development there would be no argument over anyone else using it. Actually a good idea.
And not without precedent. Look at the situation with Corning and Gorilla Glass. Seems like a similar situation.
Well, at least we now know where Apple would be without Samsung's flash, cpu, or display.
Apple would be in deep shit if Samsung wasn't willing to help them out.
Not really a rumor. Samsung announced and demo'd it last fall. It's still 10.1 @ WQXGA (2560 x 1600)
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english...111026/199826/
At 11.6" it's slightly below but all intents and purposes it's the same PPI. That would also have the appearance of having denser pixels because a laptop is likely to held farther away then a tablet.
That said, That article shows that their "demoed" 2560x1600 10.1" display was defective with many lines in the prototype. If you can't get a single model to an event to show off I have to think you are not close to being production ready.
That link also shows that the same resolution with PenTile is gearing up to be production ready but RB-GB isn't the same as RBG-RBG due to the 1/3 less sub-pixels.
And not without precedent. Look at the situation with Corning and Gorilla Glass. Seems like a similar situation.
That Samsung is so altruistic¡
So why are they suing each other again???
Because Samsung is a very large company, and the consumer electronic branch is not the same as the display production branch.
Apple would be in BIG trouble if not for Samsung. Their quality can't be matched.
Apple needs to keep Samsung happy, or else Samsung might pull the plug.
So why are they suing each other again???
Apple would be in deep shit if Samsung wasn't willing to help them out.
You guys/girls are taking the simplistic hand-wringing road here. May be beyond your intellect.
Apple is Samsung's biggest customer. I know it's a lot for you to grasp.
They do appear to appear to engineer some of their own battery tech. As far as I know they were the first one to get 1000 cycles from a LIPoly batter, however, this could be similar to how they get new displays designed for their needs. I know of no acquisitions or patents specifically for battery tech.
Apple has recently bought a company for it's NAND flash IP so we can easily say Apple has some technology under its belt in that field.
Exhibit A: http://www.appleinsider.com/articles..._displays.html
Exhibit B: http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/20/l...s-nfc-variant/
Seems I read somewhere that LG originated some of the new display's tech, but here DisplaySearch says Sharp and one other originated the high-aperture part:
http://www.displaysearchblog.com/201...etina-display/
Apple would be up the creek without a paddle if it weren't for Samsung.
Why?
Apple and Samsumg are big boys. Samsung wont say not to their biggest customer and Apple wont comprimise on quality.
Neither will let their patent battles get in the way of doing buisiness.
That's called hitting the nail on the head, my friend. Well done. In the end, business is business. I call it the "Godfather Mentality"
Apple would be in BIG trouble if not for Samsung. Their quality can't be matched.
Apple needs to keep Samsung happy, or else Samsung might pull the plug.
I disagree with the premise here. Apple needs to ensure that they pay Samsung for the work they do and pay on time. If not, Samsung might pull the plug. Otherwise, I doubt that Samsung would do something like that to a customer that pays as much as Apple does. And drives their quality as hard as Apple does. They get a double benefit. They get paid and they get process improvement.
Apple is Samsung's biggest customer. I know it's a lot for you to grasp.
I thought that Royal Dutch Shell was Samsung's biggest customer, followed by the government of the United Arab Emirates?
Where did you get your information? Are you mistaking the subsidiary, Samsung Electronics, for the parent company?
Isn't this like the mafia sharing family secrets with the police chief?
At 11.6" it's slightly below but all intents and purposes it's the same PPI. That would also have the appearance of having denser pixels because a laptop is likely to held farther away then a tablet.
That said, That article shows that their "demoed" 2560x1600 10.1" display was defective with many lines in the prototype. If you can't get a single model to an event to show off I have to think you are not close to being production ready.
That article is from 5 months ago with one guy's opinion.
That link also shows that the same resolution with PenTile is gearing up to be production ready but RB-GB isn't the same as RBG-RBG due to the 1/3 less sub-pixels.
Samsung is supposed to moving their entire S-AMOLED production to RBG-RBG some time this year but of course remains to be seen.
You guys/girls are taking the simplistic hand-wringing road here. May be beyond your intellect.
Apple is Samsung's biggest customer. I know it's a lot for you to grasp.
Seems I read somewhere that LG originated some of the new display's tech, but here DisplaySearch says Sharp and one other originated the high-aperture part:
http://www.displaysearchblog.com/201...etina-display/
Hi nequidnemis! So glad you found another forum to troll with your pseudo arrogance. How's the view at Gough @ Geary today?
You guys/girls are taking the simplistic hand-wringing road here. May be beyond your intellect.
Apple is Samsung's biggest customer. I know it's a lot for you to grasp.
Yes, but Apple contributes only about 5% to Samsung's overall revenue.