AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › WSJ: Apple investing in Sharp plant for iPad 3 displays
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

WSJ: Apple investing in Sharp plant for iPad 3 displays - Page 2

post #41 of 51
11/26/11 at 1:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

Saying that Apple needs to respond to the Fire is like saying that Apple should have responded to the low-priced PC clones.

Interesting point. Do you see the iPad falling to less than 10% of the market? Apple was never as successful when their computer biz was their main line.

Can they prosper, while ceding 90% of the market, like they did with PCs?
Reply
Reply
post #42 of 51
11/26/11 at 1:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukeskymac View Post

And iPhone's Retina Display is still considered by the majority of reviewers as the best all-round display.

Nice Try.

"Retina" is just a marketing definition of a certain resolution level. Otherwise iPhone is using 15 year old LCD-TFT technology with backlight.

New Super AMOLED HD displays match Retina resolution requirements and exceed LCD-TFT in many other ways:
Better outdoor readability
More vivid color saturation
Wider viewing angle
No motion blurs on video play
100 times better contrast ratio
Pure black levels (no backlight)
Longer average battery life (no backlight)
Thinner and lighter (no backlight)

Investing so much money in another LCD-TFT plant is bad idea. The plant is obsolete on arrival.

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply
post #43 of 51
11/26/11 at 4:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mercury99 View Post

"Retina" is just a marketing definition of a certain resolution level. Otherwise iPhone is using 15 year old LCD-TFT technology with backlight.

New Super AMOLED HD displays match Retina resolution requirements and exceed LCD-TFT in many other ways:
Better outdoor readability
More vivid color saturation
Wider viewing angle
No motion blurs on video play
100 times better contrast ratio
Pure black levels (no backlight)
Longer average battery life (no backlight)
Thinner and lighter (no backlight)

Investing so much money in another LCD-TFT plant is bad idea. The plant is obsolete on arrival.

Definitely spot on. SAMOLED HD in the Galaxy Nexus is 316ppi (qualifies as Retina) with .01ms response time and a 100,000:1 contrast ratio at 4.65in..The iPhone while technically a little higher at 326ppi is only 800:1.

It's really not close.
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
I'm not a pessimist. I'm an optimist, with experience.
Reply
post #44 of 51
11/26/11 at 5:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

Interesting point. Do you see the iPad falling to less than 10% of the market? Apple was never as successful when their computer biz was their main line.

Can they prosper, while ceding 90% of the market, like they did with PCs?

You really missed his entire point completely. I don't see how you could do that expect by willful ignorance. How did Apple respond to the PMP market they still dominate? Competitors kept trying to fill niches and Apple kept succeeding doing its own thing. At one point, I recall vividly, the competition tried to out feature the iPod while Apple instead released a PMP with no display that did nothing more than play songs.



Quote:
Originally Posted by mercury99 View Post

"Retina" is just a marketing definition of a certain resolution level. Otherwise iPhone is using 15 year old LCD-TFT technology with backlight.

New Super AMOLED HD displays match Retina resolution requirements and exceed LCD-TFT in many other ways:
Better outdoor readability
More vivid color saturation
Wider viewing angle
No motion blurs on video play
100 times better contrast ratio
Pure black levels (no backlight)
Longer average battery life (no backlight)
Thinner and lighter (no backlight)

Investing so much money in another LCD-TFT plant is bad idea. The plant is obsolete on arrival.

If LCD is crap because it's "15 year old technology" you best not read about the age of the microchip, silicon, milling of aluminum, or creation of glass. Hell, you'd end up calling the Internet a fad that's to old to use.


Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post

Definitely spot on. SAMOLED HD in the Galaxy Nexus is 316ppi (qualifies as Retina) with .01ms response time and a 100,000:1 contrast ratio at 4.65in..The iPhone while technically a little higher at 326ppi is only 800:1.

It's really not close.

Except when you count sub-pixels of the less than superior or honest PenTile display. The iPhone 4's display is still an overall superior display that others haven't yet met bested. Although, after 1.5 years they are closing in Apple's market lead. These displays are used for their thinness, coat and power use but that day is ending and next year we should start seeing the average smartphone sporting AMOLED Plus.

"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"

Reply

"Blank! BLANK! You're not looking at the big picture!"

Reply
post #45 of 51
11/26/11 at 5:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

Interesting point. Do you see the iPad falling to less than 10% of the market? Apple was never as successful when their computer biz was their main line.

Can they prosper, while ceding 90% of the market, like they did with PCs?

Uhhh... You mean like how they were prospering in 2009, before the iPad was ANY percent of the market?
"And just like that, everyone here realizes you're just another sweaty little Google licker with an axe to grind and no idea what he's talking about." --addabox
Reply
"And just like that, everyone here realizes you're just another sweaty little Google licker with an axe to grind and no idea what he's talking about." --addabox
Reply
post #46 of 51
11/27/11 at 2:50am
I am shocked the article mentions nothing about this. But what is the viewing angle? How does it compare with IPS displays? If the viewing angle is the same or better than IPS, then I think this new technology would be outstanding. But if the viewing angle is horrific, I would imagine such outweighs the benefits mentioned.

Is there no set of technical specifications on this new screen technology, such that we can confirm the viewing angles?
Reply
Reply
post #47 of 51
11/27/11 at 10:00am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDW View Post

How does it compare with IPS displays? If the viewing angle is the same or better than IPS, then I think this new technology would be outstanding.

IPS screens offer a 178 degree viewing angle. You can't improve on that b/c if you add the other 2 degrees in you are looking at it's side and can't' see the screen anyway
Reply
Reply
post #48 of 51
11/27/11 at 11:44am
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

You really missed his entire point completely. I don't see how you could do that expect by willful ignorance. How did Apple respond to the PMP market they still dominate? Competitors kept trying to fill niches and Apple kept succeeding doing its own thing. At one point, I recall vividly, the competition tried to out feature the iPod while Apple instead released a PMP with no display that did nothing more than play songs.

One thing that is different though, is that the iPhone (ironically) killed the portable music player market. So it hasn't been long enough for us to evaluate, though I don't think that would have changed any. The tablet market is getting quite competitive, but I don't think the same way as the MP3 market. I guess we'll have to reserve judgement for when the Windows 7 tablets arrive. One thing that makes it a bit different for me was the whole HP Touchpad fiasco. Look at how well it sold when it was discounted. Not that I think any one will do that again, but I belive price will play a huge part in the future. I think tablets will last much longer than iPods/MP3 players.

If a manufactrer can get a great $150 tablet then I think we have a winner. But again, it has to be great. For many, the HP Touch Pad was a better by than the iPad because of the cost/use ration. A Samsung Galaxy Tab doesn't have that especially considering it doesn't have the software/apps/ecosystem of the iPad. But we'll see. Kindle Fire is too small and limited.

If LCD is crap because it's "15 year old technology" you best not read about the age of the microchip, silicon, milling of aluminum, or creation of glass. Hell, you'd end up calling the Internet a fad that's to old to use.

You're taking that out of context and changing the structure in what he means. So you're telling me you would use a 480i CRT TV since it's older (Uh, of course, though the older the technology the less flass. CRT HDTVs still hold the best color temperature of any display, but your argument was sort of ambigous..so....)
Except when you count sub-pixels of the less than superior or honest PenTile display. The iPhone 4's display is still an overall superior display that others haven't yet met bested. Although, after 1.5 years they are closing in Apple's market lead. These displays are used for their thinness, coat and power use but that day is ending and next year we should start seeing the average smartphone sporting AMOLED Plus.

I think we could have been having an AMOLED HD Plus with pentile, making it superior to the iPhone 4S. But I think Samsung is trying to ride the wave so they give you reason to upgrade to another product. Like how Apple could have given us a 8mp camera on the iPhone 4, but that would have been a terrible idea considering it would have been harder to sell the next phone.Plus the cost is lower(and the supply strain on Samsung).

Reply
Reply
post #49 of 51
11/27/11 at 1:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

If LCD is crap because it's "15 year old technology" you best not read about the age of the microchip, silicon, milling of aluminum, or creation of glass.

Silicon, aluminum, and glass are not a technology - it is just a material. And 15 year old microchip design is definitely obsolete in so many ways.

I did not say it's "crap", but LCD with backlighting is inferior NOT because it's "15 year old technology", but because there is much better tech available now - Super AMOLED Plus and Super AMOLED HD.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-iP-...ayer_embedded#!

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply

Mac IIcx, Mac Quadra 800, Mac Performa 5200, Power Mac 8600, LaserWriter, iPhone 3G, iPad 3G, iPhone 4S | MacBook Pro, 27" iMac, iPad 3 LTE

Reply
post #50 of 51
11/27/11 at 1:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by mercury99 View Post

Silicon, aluminum, and glass are not a technology - it is just a material. And 15 year old microchip design is definitely obsolete in so many ways.

I did not say it's "crap", but LCD with backlighting is inferior NOT because it's "15 year old technology", but because there is much better tech available now - Super AMOLED Plus and Super AMOLED HD.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-iP-...ayer_embedded#!

It's self-luminating and has true infinite blacks. Might have burn-in problems...BUT YOU CAN ROLL IT!

Hmmm...edible, watchable, fruit-roll ups!
Reply
Reply
post #51 of 51
11/28/11 at 7:59am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash_beezy View Post

The fire is no threat. Steve clearly stated they will not go that direction.

I see the fire getting canned and a revision coming soon. But who knows they don't make any money off them anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I don't see it as a threat to the iPad in fact I think it will help it in the long run but it is a threat all other non-iPad tablets trying to carve out a niche, especially proper Android OS-based tablets.

I agree Fire is not a threat - not in the sense of *killing* iPad sales. But it is bound to have some effect - some potential iPad buyers will choose the Fire instead because of the price (if not this generation of Fire then the next one; Bezos is persistent if nothing else). At the same time, the Fire will help expand the tablet market. The question is - when this space evolves, will we be able to precisely isolate the actual net effect of the Fire on the iPad or, as usual, there will be too many factors to do anything more than speculate?
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › WSJ: Apple investing in Sharp plant for iPad 3 displays