Apple's next iPhone expected to consume 70% of high-res LTPS screen supply
Supply of low-temperature poly-silicon touchscreens for non-Apple vendors is expected to be tight in 2012 and 2013, as the next iPhone could consume as much as 70 percent of capacity.
Production of the next iPhone is expected to begin at the end of the second quarter or the start of the third quarter of calendar 2012, according to Taiwanese supply chain sources who spoke with DigiTimes. The next iPhone's display is expected to feature in-cell touch panels that will make the high-resolution Retina display even thinner.
In order to achieve a screen resolution of 326 pixels-per-inch, the next iPhone will reportedly use LTPS technology. The in-cell panels are expected to be built by LG Display, Japan Display and Sharp.
Those same three suppliers were identified earlier this month in a handful of reports that claimed Apple is purchasing 4-inch displays for its next iPhone. Until now, all iPhone models have featured a smaller 3.5-inch touchscreen.
Collectively, LG Display, Japan Display and Sharp have a quarterly production capacity of 95 million LTPS panels. With a current yield rate of 75 percent, the companies can produce as many as 72 million panels at the moment.
That puts Apple and its next iPhone in a position to take up as much as 70 percent of the output of LTPS panels in 2012 and 2013, tech supply chain sources reportedly said. That situation could put smartphone makers other than Apple in a difficult position for components.
Industry insiders expect that Apple will produce more than 40 million iPhone units in the third quarter of calendar 2012, growing to 45 million units in the fourth quarter of the year. Apple's current quarterly record for iPhone sales came in the holiday quarter of 2011, during which the iPhone 4S launch drove the company to sales of 37 million iPhones.
Production of the next iPhone is expected to begin at the end of the second quarter or the start of the third quarter of calendar 2012, according to Taiwanese supply chain sources who spoke with DigiTimes. The next iPhone's display is expected to feature in-cell touch panels that will make the high-resolution Retina display even thinner.
In order to achieve a screen resolution of 326 pixels-per-inch, the next iPhone will reportedly use LTPS technology. The in-cell panels are expected to be built by LG Display, Japan Display and Sharp.
Those same three suppliers were identified earlier this month in a handful of reports that claimed Apple is purchasing 4-inch displays for its next iPhone. Until now, all iPhone models have featured a smaller 3.5-inch touchscreen.
Collectively, LG Display, Japan Display and Sharp have a quarterly production capacity of 95 million LTPS panels. With a current yield rate of 75 percent, the companies can produce as many as 72 million panels at the moment.
That puts Apple and its next iPhone in a position to take up as much as 70 percent of the output of LTPS panels in 2012 and 2013, tech supply chain sources reportedly said. That situation could put smartphone makers other than Apple in a difficult position for components.
Industry insiders expect that Apple will produce more than 40 million iPhone units in the third quarter of calendar 2012, growing to 45 million units in the fourth quarter of the year. Apple's current quarterly record for iPhone sales came in the holiday quarter of 2011, during which the iPhone 4S launch drove the company to sales of 37 million iPhones.
Comments
Won't other vendors use different types of displays that will be in abundance? What makes these people think that everyone will want to use LTPS panels? Maybe they'll use less expensive panels.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Constable Odo
Won't other vendors use different types of displays that will be in abundance? What makes these people think that everyone will want to use LTPS panels? Maybe they'll use less expensive panels.
Because everyone copies what apple does and uses, nobody has original ideas, if apple used a potato as a screen, everyone would just copy it, apple invented the rectangle....etc.
On another note. Good to see apple FINALLY realizing that 3.5" is just too darn small these days. it was fine in 2007, but now, with so much rich media, videos, ability to see full websites, productivity apps, etc, 3.5" is downright restrictive. Gonna get burned at the stake for saying it but......android showed the way with bigger screens and it seems apple have finally fallen in line.
*ducks shoe being thrown*
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3
Because everyone copies what apple does and uses, nobody has original ideas, if apple used a potato as a screen, everyone would just copy it, apple invented the rectangle....etc.
Actually not as Nokia has their Clearblack amoled displays, Samsung has their AMOLED(+) which have in-cell panels for the last couple of years and Sony used WhiteMagic/Bravia screens on their mobiles. HTC has S-LCD screens I think...
So all other brands are actually doing quite different things with their displays, most of them using their own technology
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3
Because everyone copies what apple does and uses, nobody has original ideas, if apple used a potato as a screen, everyone would just copy it, apple invented the rectangle....etc.
On another note. Good to see apple FINALLY realizing that 3.5" is just too darn small these days. it was fine in 2007, but now, with so much rich media, videos, ability to see full websites, productivity apps, etc, 3.5" is downright restrictive. Gonna get burned at the stake for saying it but......android showed the way with bigger screens and it seems apple have finally fallen in line.
*ducks shoe being thrown*
Not an attack, but ... I'm constantly amazed by the complete lack of sense in comments like this about screen size.
The whole concept of there being general agreement amongst the public that 3.5 is "too small" or that "everyone knows" bigger is better now is just laughably ridiculous. Whether or not the screen size changes, these kind of statements are completely illogical nonsense. Although if they *do* change the size, all those that make them will feel vindicated and go on and on about how they were "right" when in fact it will always be a nonsense statement.
So they've increased the screen size from 3.5" to 4", but are retaining exactly the same PPI? I call BS.
Apple has four options:
1. Leave everything unchanged. 3.5", 326 PPI.
2. Increase the screen size to 4", while retaining the current 960x640 resolution. PPI would drop by around 10%, but it would not be noticeable to most people (especially since the viewing distance for a larger screen might be farther).
3. Increase the screen size to 4" and increase the screen resolution. In order to retain the 326 PPI, they would have to choose some strange resolution like 1054x702.
4. Increase the screen size to 4" and choose a more common resolution, perhaps 1200x800. Or 1024x768. But in that case, the PPI would be somewhat different.
I believe that option #3 (the one suggested by this article) is actually the least likely of the scenarios. Personally, I think #2 is more likely with #4 not far behind.
Toss into circular file. It's from Digitimes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
So they've increased the screen size from 3.5" to 4", but are retaining exactly the same PPI? I call BS.
Apple has four options:
1. Leave everything unchanged. 3.5", 326 PPI.
2. Increase the screen size to 4", while retaining the current 960x640 resolution. PPI would drop by around 10%, but it would not be noticeable to most people (especially since the viewing distance for a larger screen might be farther).
3. Increase the screen size to 4" and increase the screen resolution. In order to retain the 326 PPI, they would have to choose some strange resolution like 1054x702.
4. Increase the screen size to 4" and choose a more common resolution, perhaps 1200x800. Or 1024x768. But in that case, the PPI would be somewhat different.
I believe that option #3 (the one suggested by this article) is actually the least likely of the scenarios. Personally, I think #2 is more likely with #4 not far behind.
So you're dismissing the most prevalent rumor going around - longer screen (same phone size) but same width at 1136 x 640?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee
Not an attack, but ... I'm constantly amazed by the complete lack of sense in comments like this about screen size.
The whole concept of there being general agreement amongst the public that 3.5 is "too small" or that "everyone knows" bigger is better now is just laughably ridiculous. Whether or not the screen size changes, these kind of statements are completely illogical nonsense. Although if they *do* change the size, all those that make them will feel vindicated and go on and on about how they were "right" when in fact it will always be a nonsense statement.
I disagree with the "lack of common sense" comment. Sleepy nailed it perfectly when he said that 3.5" was is just too darn small these days. it was fine in 2007, but now, with so much rich media, videos, ability to see full websites, productivity apps, etc, 3.5" is downright restrictive. I'm not saying everyone wants the ridiculous sized Galaxy Note mini-tablet as a phone. But the way we use a smartphone these days is a helluva lot different than what we did 5 years ago. Using media/videos/websites/apps/games etc.. is seriously challenging on such a small 3.5" screen. More often these days, I find myself having to hold the phone closer to read small text.. having to constantly zoom in to identify/click on items correctly.. or just not being accurate enough when navigating the interface on such a small screen. It simply should not be that challenging to use. What's laughable is that someone disagrees with that.
About the only complaints that I have in the 2 years I've used my 4 & 4S, is that the screen is too small & I need a faster LTE connection. Both are older, restrictive technologies that literally make my iPhone more challenging to use. Apple could easily increase the size of the screen to 4 inches, and not need to increase the form factor much.. simply by using a thinner bezel. It would make the phone alot more efficient to use and I believe the vast majority of iPhone users would be extremely satisfied with that upgrade.
Not at all. That would be the option #4 that I listed - which I said is the second most likely scenario in my opinion. But that would not be 326 PPI, so it makes the Digitimes "prediction" incorrect - which was my entire point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3
On another note. Good to see apple FINALLY realizing that 3.5" is just too darn small these days. it was fine in 2007,
Unless people's thumbs have grown longer since 2007, then 3.5 inch screens are still the perfect size.
And you have no evidence other than baseless rumors to say that Apple is going to make screens too big to use with one hand.,
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3
On another note. Good to see apple FINALLY realizing that 3.5" is just too darn small these days.
You don't know that. This is rumor not fact. So I would save such praise for when the phone is actually released and is bigger than 3.5"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daekwan
I disagree with the "lack of common sense" comment. Sleepy nailed it perfectly when he said that 3.5" was is just too darn small these days. it was fine in 2007, but now, with so much rich media, videos, ability to see full websites, productivity apps, etc, 3.5" is downright restrictive.
1. that it is too small it personal opinion
2. even if it is that doesn't mean Apple is going to make a bigger phone. After all if you want a bigger screen, Apple could just say go get an iPad.
There is a huge installed base of software that uses the current aspect ration and pixel count. Changing either of those would significantly impact developers and cause a splintering of the iOS products. So I don't think Apple is going to add some rows of pixels to one end of the display just for grins.
Regarding size, yes, a larger display would be nice. But there are constraints such as the size of people's pockets that limit how big you can make a device and expect them to carry it everywhere.
Maintaining the aspect ratio and pixel count, lowering the PPI slightly, seems a viable option to me. Would Apple maintain both sizes? Are there other components they could jam into a slightly larger form? Could they put more power hungry chips in and use the extra space for battery? Or go the other way and get some more battery space to extend use time?
We'll see.
- Jasen.
I'm gonna go on record and say that I figure it's going to move to 4".
And I hate that. Is 3.5" on the small end these days? Sure. Is it too small? Only an idiot would say that.
I don't like the idea of a 4" phone, regardless of its manufacturer. I've seen 4" phones, and they're all terrible. There's a reason landline phones haven't grown into foot-long rulers or leviathan black bananas. They're as big as they need to be to serve their function.
When size gets in the way of use-moreover, when size necessitates three different holding positions to actually use the device as intended-it's the wrong size.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3
Because everyone copies what apple does and uses, nobody has original ideas, if apple used a potato as a screen, everyone would just copy it, apple invented the rectangle....etc.
On another note. Good to see apple FINALLY realizing that 3.5" is just too darn small these days. it was fine in 2007, but now, with so much rich media, videos, ability to see full websites, productivity apps, etc, 3.5" is downright restrictive. Gonna get burned at the stake for saying it but......android showed the way with bigger screens and it seems apple have finally fallen in line.
*ducks shoe being thrown*
If the rumor of an Aspect Ratio change to get the 4" screen is accurate, everything will still be just as small.
"Is 3.5" on the small end these days? Sure. Is it too small? Only an idiot would say that."
I would argue that "too small" depends on what you're using the phone for. Simply using it for movies and web-surfing, I find the iPhone screen adequate. I'd personally prefer a larger screen, but 3.5 is OK.
3.5 is definitely "too small" for comfortably using it as a GPS navigator. I use Navigon on the iPhone and while its leaps ahead of my old Tom Tom in functionality, every time I use it I wish it had the old larger Tom Tom screen size. Because the phone sits on my dashboard when navigating (much further away than when I hold it), I find myself having to look at it longer than I'd like when I'm driving. What should be quick glaces turn into longer stares as I'm trying to figure out where the next turn is on the smaller screen.
I suspect Apple realizes this, and will argue that the new screen size is there to make use of its (reportedly) new 3D navigation software. Just my guess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
Not at all. That would be the option #4 that I listed - which I said is the second most likely scenario in my opinion. But that would not be 326 PPI, so it makes the Digitimes "prediction" incorrect - which was my entire point.
Actually, PPI will remain the same with the speculation elongation, which is why I thought it was excluded from your list.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GS Turn
If the rumor of an Aspect Ratio change to get the 4" screen is accurate, everything will still be just as small.
Option 2 looks SWEET! Would love to have some 16:9 sweetness on the go. Youtube vids, movies, everything HD will be playable at the native resolution and fill the whole screen up. Bring it on.
And no worries with apps. Android has code in it to automatically scale to any screen resolution
http://developer.android.com/guide/practices/screens_support.html
That's just a lot of words to say that apps will look more or less the same on any screen size (IF YOU WANT IT TO, the developer can choose to use the extra space for what they see fit)
And I'm pretty confident iOS has the same, or that it will be pretty easy for iOS to add the same. (patents withstanding)
Would love to see that option 2 become a reality. Maybe not a circular home button though, that may be too small a target.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3
Would love to have some 16:9 sweetness on the go. Youtube vids, movies, everything HD will be playable at the native resolution and fill the whole screen up.
Except movies are 2.39:1 and you'll still have black bars.
It sure read like you excluded that possibility when you wrote, "So they've increased the screen size from 3.5" to 4", but are retaining exactly the same PPI? I call BS." and "3. Increase the screen size to 4" and increase the screen resolution. In order to retain the 326 PPI, they would have to choose some strange resolution like 1054x702."
If they use 1146x640 you get 326 PPI. You also get no change to the phone's width and since most scrolling occurs in portrait mode Apple likely has a relatively easy time in creating APIs and an SDK that can deal with showing more what needs to be scrolled. Apple also gets the opportunity to hold its cards close to its vest before it announces and demos the 6th gen iPhone in September without having to prep developers many months in advance which would be the case for any change in non-scaling pixel size.
On top of all that the issue with a larger display comes from the width more than the height (where they also have more room to play) is an issue for consumers. They also only have to cut the sheets with a different aspect ratio to get them to work. It's only a single pixel off (1136x639) being exactly 16:9 aspect ratio. It all seems to fit very well.