AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple to use three major suppliers for iPad 3's Retina display
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple to use three major suppliers for iPad 3's Retina display

post #1 of 21
Thread Starter 
Apple this week continues to align component suppliers for its third-generation iPad, now expected to launch sometime in early 2012, including three primary LCD makers and two backlight-unit suppliers, according to a new report.

Pointing to its usual "industry sources," DigiTimes reports that the iPad maker has chosen LG Display, Samsung Electronics and Sharp to supply LCD panels for the iPad 3, with LG remaining the biggest panel supplier.

Samsung is said to be the number-two iPad 3 panel supplier, but Sharp reportedly stands a chance of overtaking its Korea competitor if it is able to run stable supplies of quality panels for the next generation tablet, those sources said.

Supply of the so-called Retina display expected to make its debut on the iPad 3 will play a pivotal role in Apple's capacity to meet demand for the next-generation tablet.

Already, there have been reports that Apple was forced to abandon an ambitious plan to begin mass production of the iPad 3 this year because Samsung and LG have faced difficulties producing adequate yields of the 2,048 x 1,536-pixel displays.

Instead, the Cupertino-based company will now reportedly ask its suppliers to ramp up production and try to improve the yield rate for the new iPad in the fourth quarter before its official launch in early 2012.



Along with its three Retina display providers, Apple will reportedly tap Taiwan-based Radiant Opto-Electronics to become the major supplier of backlight units (BLUs) for the device. It will reportedly supply over half of the BLUs required by LG and all of the BLUs needed by Samsung.

Sharp will also use parts from Radiant but will supplement them with supply of BLUs from an unnamed Japanese BLU supplier, the report added.
post #2 of 21
I still don't believe Apple ever planned on releasing iPad 3 this year...
post #3 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

...always expected...

Fixed. Seriously, guys.
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #4 of 21
What constitutes "retina"? The pixel density is much lower w/ that resolution then, say, the iphone.
post #5 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishstick_kitty View Post

What constitutes "retina"? The pixel density is much lower w/ that resolution then, say, the iphone.

The held distance is farther, so it evens out.
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #6 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishstick_kitty View Post

What constitutes "retina"? The pixel density is much lower w/ that resolution then, say, the iphone.

Jobs defines it as a pixel density at certain distance from the eye that exceeds the limits of the human eye.

For the iPhone, at a [recommended?] distance of 12" (i think), it is 300ppi - the phone actually exceeds that at 326 or something. the iPad is likely meant to be held at a greater distance, requiring a lower ppi to be "retina"
post #7 of 21
Since Apple is growing at such a pace that suppliers aren't being able to match anymore

Since Apple will soon be entering the 55" screen device business

Since Apple is fighting its biggest supplier

I believe Apple will eventually be forced to get into manufacturing. They're almost there with their proprietary aluminum frames, their specialty displays, their specialized Chips.

I don't think it'll be possible for Apple to continue growing at the exploding pace it is set about to grow without having that end tightly secured.

Maybe after a few court battles, it will buy Samsung out.

But I would really prefer Sony, not Samsung, for Apple to buy out.
post #8 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by XamaX View Post

Since Apple is growing at such a pace that suppliers aren't being able to match anymore

So they'll just find more suppliers...

Quote:
Since Apple will soon be entering the 55" screen device business

No.

Quote:
Maybe after a few court battles, it will buy Samsung out.

You realize just how big Samsung is, right? They do construction equipment, too, among other things. This absolutely won't happen.

Quote:
But I would really prefer Sony, not Samsung, for Apple to buy out.

Every time that gets tossed around, it's just to raise stock prices. It also won't happen. Apple would just discontinue absolutely everything and use Sony's panel and sensor manufacturing. Nothing else about Sony appeals to Apple.
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #9 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

The held distance is farther, so it evens out.

Not quite. The standard distance from the device to the eye should be 25 cm or 10 inches whether it is the iPhone, iPad, or a sheet of paper. Therefore, the pixel density should be the same. As a practical matter, the iPhone 4 slightly exceeds the threshold for a retina display. This will allow for a slightly lower pixel density than the iPhone's 326 dpi.

Assuming that a true retina display has 300 dpi, then an iPad display should have a pixel size of 2327x1745 to qualify as a true retina display. The panel listed in the OP is about 15% below this threshold. What this means as a practical matter is that the display will have to be held at 11.5 inches or 29 cm for the pixel structure to disappear.
post #10 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Me View Post

Not quite. The standard distance from the device to the eye should be 25 cm or 10 inches whether it is the iPhone, iPad, or a sheet of paper. Therefore, the pixel density should be the same.

Says who?

I certainly hold my phone at a different distance than a book or a laptop or an iPad.

In fact, given the iPads much larger size, it would be very uncomfortable to hold it at the same distance as a phone. You would have to keep moving it around and your field of view would be so limited that it would be nearly useless.
post #11 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Me View Post

Not quite. The standard distance from the device to the eye should be 25 cm or 10 inches whether it is the iPhone, iPad, or a sheet of paper. Therefore, the pixel density should be the same. As a practical matter, the iPhone 4 slightly exceeds the threshold for a retina display. This will allow for a slightly lower pixel density than the iPhone's 326 dpi.

Assuming that a true retina display has 300 dpi, then an iPad display should have a pixel size of 2327x1745 to qualify as a true retina display. The panel listed in the OP is about 15% below this threshold. What this means as a practical matter is that the display will have to be held at 11.5 inches or 29 cm for the pixel structure to disappear.

You are right, but remember Tallest Skil knows all... ask about anything about anything and he will give a declarative, final answer as if he actually knows it
post #12 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by aknabi View Post

You are right, but remember Tallest Skil knows all... ask about anything about anything and he will give a declarative, final answer as if he actually knows it

LOL BURN I'M REALLY REELING FROM THAT ONE.

PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #13 of 21
Retina display, as Apple is using it, is a marketing term. It is intended to convey the idea that the resolution is so great that you can no longer see the pixels...and therefore everything looks sharper and/or, images contain a lot more "definable" detail for a given screen size. Those of you quibbling over the National Institute of Standards (or whatever) official definition of "retina display" are missing the point. At some distance, every display becomes a retina display because you can no longer discern individual pixels. That's why it doesn't matter that the pixel density on a 1080P 60" TV is only in the 30s/in, yet still looks HD...as long you aren't sitting too close.

My concern is whether powering a display with that level of detail impacts battery life. As an avid photographer, I'd love to have the higher res display, but not at the expense of significant battery life. Anyone with thoughts on that impact?
post #14 of 21
It has already been reported a while back that Apple is investing with new suppliers in South America. They are well positioned to scale up.
post #15 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdhayes117 View Post

My concern is whether powering a display with that level of detail impacts battery life. As an avid photographer, I'd love to have the higher res display, but not at the expense of significant battery life. Anyone with thoughts on that impact?

It's definitely an issue. Battery life will likely take a slight dive, but no doubt they'll find a way to expand that battery capacity and/or make the components use less power or make them thinner so the battery has more room.
post #16 of 21
Can we assume the ipad 3 will launch this spring with a retina screen and a quad-core A6?
We become what we behold. We shape our tools and then our tools shape us.- Marshall McLuhan

Join 'The New Middle Class Movement' @ http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Ne...45269528896164
Reply
We become what we behold. We shape our tools and then our tools shape us.- Marshall McLuhan

Join 'The New Middle Class Movement' @ http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Ne...45269528896164
Reply
post #17 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodification View Post

Can we assume the ipad 3 will launch this spring with a retina screen and a quad-core A6?

Not sure if the A6's chip design base is quad-core, but A6 is the anticipated name. Retina Display is also the primary rumor display for the iPad 3.

But as with anything Apple, nothing is confirmed and we can't really assume anything other than that there will be another model.
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
PhilBoogie
That's Google alright. For a stupid company they sure do dumb things.
Reply
post #18 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

Says who?

I certainly hold my phone at a different distance than a book or a laptop or an iPad.

In fact, given the iPads much larger size, it would be very uncomfortable to hold it at the same distance as a phone. You would have to keep moving it around and your field of view would be so limited that it would be nearly useless.

How about every optometrist on Earth? However about the scientists and engineers who design optical instruments such as telescopes, microscopes, binoculars, and eye glasses? The 10-inch distance from the eye is called the nearpoint for normal vision. People who need to hold reading materials farther away are called farsighted and need reading glasses--at least. People who require reading material to be closer are called nearsighted and also need corrective lenses. One design goal for telescopes, microscopes, binoculars, and such like is to place the virtual final image 25 cm (10 inches) in front of the eye. Viewers with problem vision, however, can adjust the eyepiece(s) so that the image(s) is(are) comfortable for them.
post #19 of 21
With three companies making the displays, would you expect them to be exactly the same, indistinguishable, to meet Apple's strict design criteria or would the user be able to tell the three apart, i.e., one may be better quality or look better than the other two? Just wondering.

I bought a Lexus a few years ago. The first few months of production were made in Japan, but production was being shifted to Canada later in the model year. I got one of the last Japan-built models and often wondered if one site would have built a better quality model than the other or if their build quality was exactly the same.
Anthracite
Reply
Anthracite
Reply
post #20 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Not sure if the A6's chip design base is quad-core, but A6 is the anticipated name. Retina Display is also the primary rumor display for the iPad 3.

But as with anything Apple, nothing is confirmed and we can't really assume anything other than that there will be another model.

I'm assuming that the ipad 3 will need a serious performance boost to handle the increased retina resolution and the fact that the Sony PS Vita (which is not really a direct competitor) will be shipping with it's standard quad-core in the USA in early 2012.
We become what we behold. We shape our tools and then our tools shape us.- Marshall McLuhan

Join 'The New Middle Class Movement' @ http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Ne...45269528896164
Reply
We become what we behold. We shape our tools and then our tools shape us.- Marshall McLuhan

Join 'The New Middle Class Movement' @ http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Ne...45269528896164
Reply
post #21 of 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by XamaX View Post

Maybe after a few court battles, it will buy Samsung out.


I can see you got your MBA at Harvard Business School and your JD at Yale Law School. Your business acumen and knowledge of the legal process truly shines. No really. Keep talking! I want to hear more from you!!!


New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Apple to use three major suppliers for iPad 3's Retina display