Apple has taken over Qualcomm's IMOD Mirasol display lab in Taiwan

Posted:
in General Discussion edited December 2015
Apple is now operating a top secret production laboratory in Longtan, Taiwan, formerly run by Qualcomm to develop a unique, low-power display technology known as IMOD, or Interferometric Modulator Display.


Apple site in Longtan. Source: Maurice Tsai/Bloomberg


According to a report by Tim Culpan for Bloomberg, Apple began operating the lab "as it aims to make products thinner, lighter, brighter and more energy-efficient."

The report stated that lab employs at least 50 engineers and has recruited talent from display maker AU Optronics Corp. as well as Qualcomm, the former owner of the building.

The lab now features no signage, but Bloomberg reported that the reception area features an Apple logo and an iMac "displaying Apple's standard visitor registration screen."

While the receptionist and security guards all refused to comment on the facility's ownership, government records show that the building is registered to Apple Taiwan, and a staff in the building were observed wearing Apple ID badges.

Bloomberg speculated that Apple might want to "reduce reliance on the technology developed by suppliers such as Samsung Electronics Co., LG Display Co., Sharp Corp. and Japan Display Inc," and instead "develop the production processes in-house and outsource to smaller manufacturers such as Taiwan's AU Optronics or Innolux Corp."

Apple currently uses LCD screens in its Macs and iOS devices and an OLED display for Apple Watch. In passing, the report noted that the Apple lab was "where Qualcomm tried to develop to develop its own displays called Mirasol."

MEMS the word



Qualcomm Mirasol displays used an entirely different technology compared to conventional backlit LCDs (which create an image by electrically positioning liquid crystals and then shining visible light through it) or the more recent OLED (which creates an illuminated image from diodes, requiring no backlight and creating deeper blacks).

Qualcomm's IMOD technology uses an array of microscopic mirror-like elements that can reflect light of a specific color. Like OLED, it doesn't require a backlight. It also only uses energy when being being switched on or off; once an image is created, it requires no power to refresh or retain it, similar to E-Ink displays used in e-readers like the Kindle.

Also like E-Ink, IMOD technology maintains full visibility in direct sunlight, unlike LCDs and OLED. But rather than moving around dye like an E-Ink screen, IMOD uses tiny moving mirror-like elements, referred to as being a micro-electro-mechanical system, or MEMS (also known as a "micro-machine"). The downside to IMOD has historically been that it reproduces flat, unsaturated colors, a problem that may be possible to fix.








Source: Qualcomm


CNN reported in 2007 that the technology was initially conceptualized by electrical engineer Mark Miles, inspired by Blue Morpho butterflies, which reflect light using nanoscale structures on their wings that cause incoming light waves to interfere with one another, reflecting only specific wavelengths, resulting in the appearance of an iridescent, brilliant color.

Qualcomm acquired Iridigm, Miles' IMOD company, in 2004 for $170 million, hoping to create a market for the IMOD technology it branded Mirasol. However, Qualcomm hasn't been able to find a one. A decade later, the company introduced a Toq smartwatch with an IMOD screen, but the device flopped.


Source: CNET


In reviewing the device, CNET noted that "Qualcomm's Mirasol screen on the Toq smartwatch looks brighter in sunlight than other display technology."

This summer, Qualcomm took a $142 million charge on its Mirasol display business, after rumors from a year ago indicated the company's Qualcomm MEMS subsidiary would be selling off its Longtan Mirasol panel plant to Apple's primary chip fab TSMC.

That indicates the possibility that Apple may have acquired more than just the facility, and instead has some interest in using Mirasol IMOD technology, which has long been regarded as a offering an advanced technological breakthrough in enabling a new class of low-power displays for use in phones, tablets or wearables. The reported Qualcomm hires may reinforce this idea.


Source: Qualcomm


Also: Apple just bought a MEMS fab



If Apple did take over Mirasol development from the financially strapped Qualcomm--which was forced to dump its less performant businesses under shareholder pressure--it may also have some relation to Apple's recent purchase of a small chip fab in San Jose, formerly used by Maxim Integrated Products to produce MEMS components.

Maxim had been building MEMS-based sensors targeting the consumer market after acquiring SensorDynamics in 2011 for $164 million. Maxim announced a departure from the market earlier this year, reportedly after losing a contract to supply components to Samsung for use in a flagship smartphone.

Apple could be planning to use the former Maxim MEMS fab to produce sensors of its own, or to pursue research into other MEMS areas including IMOD screens. "The end result is a flexible and robust process that enables conversion, with minimal modification, of many FPD fabs into Mirasol display foundries" - Qualcomm

While information on IMOD technology from Qualcomm is now harder to find, the company once published a white paper that explained that "Qualcomm's Mirasol displays are produced using a process known as surface micro-machining, which is derived from the wafer scale roots of MEMS fabrication.

"The name refers to the idea of building all of the structure and components of the MEMS device on the surface of the underlying substrate. In the case of Mirasol displays, these comprise an array of deposited metal and metal-oxide films which are lithographically patterned to produce a microscopic planar structure. The result is a monolithic electro-optic display which requires fewer process steps to build than the TFT array in a LCD."

It also explained that Mirasol displays were relatively easy to produce from a typical FPD (Fabrication and Prototype Design) fab, noting that "the overarching manufacturing benefit of Mirasol display production is that the process was engineered to utilize infrastructure already in place in FPD fabs. All of the materials used for Mirasol display fabrication currently exist within the FPD palette and, in most cases, substitute materials may be utilized. The end result is a flexible and robust process that enables conversion, with minimal modification, of many FPD fabs into Mirasol display foundries, minimizing the time needed to bring IMOD technology to market."

Apple has acquired at least a half dozen mystery companies this year



Over fiscal 2015, Apple said it acquired 15 companies, but the identity of at least 6 of these are not known. Regarding the identity of its acquisitions, Apple's chief executive Tim Cook has noted "some of which we'll try to keep quiet and some of which seems to be impossible to keep quiet."

Given Apple's vast capital, it is now in a position to buy up any number of struggling, emerging technologies at a discount as the rest of the vendors in the smartphone, tablet, PC and wearable industries struggle to sell undifferentiated commodity Android products at low, low prices and their suppliers suffer upstream because of it.

Both Qualcomm and Maxim are examples of firms directly impacted by a global collapse in smartphone profitability that has left Apple with 94 percent of the global earnings from smartphones. Texas Instruments and NVIDIA have both similarly given up on consumer smartphone processors, as Apple took over the high end of the market as it developed its own proprietary A-series SoC processors for use in its iOS devices.
cornchip
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 29
    Brilliant technology! Let's hope it's brought to fruition by the great Apple!
    edited December 2015 redgeminipabloggerblog
  • Reply 2 of 29
    That laboratory in Longtan, Taiwan is one butt-ugly building!
  • Reply 3 of 29
    As expected, non-LCD based displays are the future.
    cornchip
  • Reply 4 of 29
    This sounds great. Good move.
  • Reply 5 of 29
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    So if the devices can't be back lite and reflect incoming light, how do we see the screen in the dark?    Adding illumination to the front would seem to add a lot of thickness.  

    In in any event I try to remain hopeful.    Currently OLED tech just isn't good enough things the reliance on LCD, this might be an alternative.  
  • Reply 6 of 29
    radarthekatradarthekat Posts: 3,843moderator
    wizard69 said:
    So if the devices can't be back lite and reflect incoming light, how do we see the screen in the dark?    Adding illumination to the front would seem to add a lot of thickness.  

    In in any event I try to remain hopeful.    Currently OLED tech just isn't good enough things the reliance on LCD, this might be an alternative.  
    Might be that LED edge lighting could serve the purpose.  It would be cheap and not add to the display thickness.
  • Reply 7 of 29
    i read once that if any company could tackle the latency of a touch pen input device, it would be apple.

    now i wonder if any company can make these kinds of displays, it might be apple.
  • Reply 8 of 29
    19831983 Posts: 1,225member
    This is quite an exciting development, if Apple could pull this off, this display tech could be a game changer for the industry! I hope they can and that it won't take too long.
    cornchip
  • Reply 9 of 29
    Given Apple's vast capital, it is now in a position to buy up any number of struggling, emerging technologies at a discount as the rest of the vendors in the smartphone, tablet, PC and wearable industries struggle to sell undifferentiated commodity Android products at low, low prices and their suppliers suffer upstream because of it.

    I don't think I'm very happy about this. Qualcomm seems to have tried something different with Mirasol; I suspect there are many other emerging technology companies with great products. But they can't break into the market unless a behemoth like Apple, Samsung, Intel, etc. buys them and puts the tech in their products. The little innovator's only chance is to survive long enough to be noticed by a giant company and get acquired? That sounds like a sad world.

    Even if a smaller Android maker tried to incorporate some cool cutting edge tech, the market segment is so fragmented they would be a tiny ripple in the pool of products.

    IanMC2
  • Reply 10 of 29
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,767member
    jasenj1 said:
    Given Apple's vast capital, it is now in a position to buy up any number of struggling, emerging technologies at a discount as the rest of the vendors in the smartphone, tablet, PC and wearable industries struggle to sell undifferentiated commodity Android products at low, low prices and their suppliers suffer upstream because of it.

    I don't think I'm very happy about this. Qualcomm seems to have tried something different with Mirasol; I suspect there are many other emerging technology companies with great products. But they can't break into the market unless a behemoth like Apple, Samsung, Intel, etc. buys them and puts the tech in their products. The little innovator's only chance is to survive long enough to be noticed by a giant company and get acquired? That sounds like a sad world.

    Even if a smaller Android maker tried to incorporate some cool cutting edge tech, the market segment is so fragmented they would be a tiny ripple in the pool of products.

    That's been the case for the last 30 years, except in the pure software world like Facebook and Google.
    It takes just too much money to make a mark these days and a crap tech can rule if you're better tech can't find a way to get to market.
    cornchip
  • Reply 11 of 29
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    jasenj1 said:
    Given Apple's vast capital, it is now in a position to buy up any number of struggling, emerging technologies at a discount as the rest of the vendors in the smartphone, tablet, PC and wearable industries struggle to sell undifferentiated commodity Android products at low, low prices and their suppliers suffer upstream because of it.

    I don't think I'm very happy about this. Qualcomm seems to have tried something different with Mirasol; I suspect there are many other emerging technology companies with great products. But they can't break into the market unless a behemoth like Apple, Samsung, Intel, etc. buys them and puts the tech in their products. The little innovator's only chance is to survive long enough to be noticed by a giant company and get acquired? That sounds like a sad world.

    Even if a smaller Android maker tried to incorporate some cool cutting edge tech, the market segment is so fragmented they would be a tiny ripple in the pool of products.

    The problem is that as technology becomes ever more sophisticated over the years, the expenses of developing, and producing a new technology become greater. It's unfortunatel, but that's true most of the time. Unless some breakthrough occurs that simplifies things dramatically, expenses are going to continue to grow. A smaller company simply doesn't have the capital to develop, and bring to market, many new technologies, which is why the go to venture capital companies. But these companies are not that patient. 

    With some criticizing Apple for only spending about 3.6% of its sales on R&D, they doesn't seem to understand that that's still $8.5 billion. No matter how you look at it, that's a lot of money, and it will increase next year. With Apple buying a lot of these small technology companies, a lot of these invented technologies will get the home they otherwise might not get, and that's a good thing. The people inventing these technologies get high level R&D and production positions, which gives them return on all of their work.

    Overall, everyone benefits. The startups have success in some way, and we get to reap their innovations through Apple, and others.
    edited December 2015 cornchip
  • Reply 12 of 29
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    I'm wondering if it's possible to use one way mirrors with this, so that light can be pushed through the mirrors in darker situations, rather than having it shine on the mirrors, which seems to be a difficult thing, as the light would be arriving obliquely, rather than straight on as a reflection from environmental light would. This would allow a bright light in darker rooms, which using a combination of reflected and passed through light in a caring ration in the mid lit situation, while no passed through the light would be used in bright situations.

    it still doesn't solve the poor color and contrast these displays have shown. Some way would be needed to fix that.
  • Reply 13 of 29
    cornchipcornchip Posts: 1,950member
    As another poster has stated, if Apple has bought the tech, it's likely close to ready for prime time. It will be interesting to see how long it will be before it shows up in an Apple product. I'll just go ahead and guess 7s. 

    Now come on Liquidmetal!!!

    On a separate note, the new forum engine is WAY buggy on iPhone.
  • Reply 14 of 29
    calicali Posts: 3,494member
    GREAT News!

    Maybe they'll get closer to the e-ink hybrid I've been waiting years for.

    Imagine if you can watch videos on this thing but once you open a magazine, iBooks or Reader mode the screen displays natural print in full color that's easy on the eyes.
    cornchip
  • Reply 15 of 29
    jsmythe00 said:
    Guys...it's not IF they can. Apple no doubt already has. They are securing structures for mass production and more advanced testing. 

    Most likely they've been looking at this for years and finally said it works  now let's get the backbone together for production yield analysis etc...
    I think you are jumping the gun a bit (perhaps even more so than the author).  

    Remember that the only actual facts in the article are that Apple has bought the two buildings in question and does research there.  The whole Mirassol/MEMS part is speculation only.  In typical DED fashion he has grafted it all together into an intriguing story, but it remains a story not a fact.  DED has been wrong almost as many times he has been right with this sort of mock-up of facts and possibilities.  

    Other outlets are pushing the same story but with a different supposition as to the key technology involved.  

    All we really know here for a fact is that Apple is very seriously investigating new display technologies of some type, and that they probably intend to bring display manufacture "in-house" in the near future.  It could be MEMS, it could be Micro-LED, or it could be something else.  

    MEMS seems the least likely to me, but then I'm just guessing, just as DED is.  
    edited December 2015 cornchip
  • Reply 16 of 29
    wizard69 said:
    So if the devices can't be back lite and reflect incoming light, how do we see the screen in the dark?    Adding illumination to the front would seem to add a lot of thickness.  

    In in any event I try to remain hopeful.    Currently OLED tech just isn't good enough things the reliance on LCD, this might be an alternative.  
    Your hand wringing over "but but but no backlight" also holds true for e-ink displays like the Pebble Watch and the Amazon Kindle readers, except that Amazon has already solved that with an excellent front-light built in to the Kindle Paperwhite. "I try to remain hopeful" is just an expression of concern trolling.
    Prof_Peabody
  • Reply 17 of 29
    cornchip said:
    As another poster has stated, if Apple has bought the tech, it's likely close to ready for prime time. It will be interesting to see how long it will be before it shows up in an Apple product. I'll just go ahead and guess 7s. 

    Now come on Liquidmetal!!!

    On a separate note, the new forum engine is WAY buggy on iPhone.
    If Apple buys the tech, it is immediately attacked by the usual suspects, who express "concern" over the disadvantages of said tech, and "remain hopeful" that these problems can be overcome.

    On a separate note, these forums are only being tested on the developer's Chromebook and Android phone.
    cornchip
  • Reply 18 of 29
    Your hand wringing over "but but but no backlight" also holds true for e-ink displays like the Pebble Watch and the Amazon Kindle readers, except that Amazon has already solved that with an excellent front-light built in to the Kindle Paperwhite. "I try to remain hopeful" is just an expression of concern trolling.
    I wouldn't call the front-light on the Paperwhite "excellent". "Pretty good", "functional", but not "excellent". Mine shows some serious inconsistencies.
  • Reply 19 of 29
    wizard69 said:
    So if the devices can't be back lite and reflect incoming light, how do we see the screen in the dark?    Adding illumination to the front would seem to add a lot of thickness.  

    In in any event I try to remain hopeful.    Currently OLED tech just isn't good enough things the reliance on LCD, this might be an alternative.  
    OLED is already superior than LCDs in more ways than it is lacking.
  • Reply 20 of 29
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    jasenj1 said:
    Given Apple's vast capital, it is now in a position to buy up any number of struggling, emerging technologies at a discount as the rest of the vendors in the smartphone, tablet, PC and wearable industries struggle to sell undifferentiated commodity Android products at low, low prices and their suppliers suffer upstream because of it.

    I don't think I'm very happy about this. Qualcomm seems to have tried something different with Mirasol; I suspect there are many other emerging technology companies with great products. But they can't break into the market unless a behemoth like Apple, Samsung, Intel, etc. buys them and puts the tech in their products. The little innovator's only chance is to survive long enough to be noticed by a giant company and get acquired? That sounds like a sad world.

    Even if a smaller Android maker tried to incorporate some cool cutting edge tech, the market segment is so fragmented they would be a tiny ripple in the pool of products.

    Don't be an ass here.    This may be a tech that Apple and Qualcomm spent years on, you really have no idea here.  As far as the tech, a lot of stock holders are stupid, this very much looks like a case where Qualcomm management was forced to sell the business.  It really has nothing to do with what Apple or Samsung where willing to buy.   

    This is business could have easily been purchased by a smaller company and survived on niche markets.   The good thing here is that if Apple is successful with this purchase the technology could see a much wider distribution to actual users.  You should be happy here not sad.  
Sign In or Register to comment.