or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Samsung is sole supplier of Apple's iPad Retina displays - report
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Samsung is sole supplier of Apple's iPad Retina displays - report

post #1 of 159
Thread Starter 
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.

Citing an analyst at iSuppli, Bloomberg reported on Tuesday that Samsung is the only company building touchscreen high-resolution displays for Apple's third-generation iPad. LG Display and Sharp were said to be in the mix, but didn't live up to Apple's quality requirements.

"The display specifications on the new iPad are very demanding in terms of the very high resolution," iSuppli's Vinita Jakhanwal said. "Achieving this high resolution without compromising on the power consumption and brightness and maintaining Apple's quality standards are supposedly proving to be a challenge for LG Display and Sharp."

Apple's continued reliance on Samsung for components stands in contrast to a legal showdown between the two companies, which both sell smartphones, tablets and computers. The two companies have filed more than 30 lawsuits against one another across the globe, and the legal showdown now spans 10 countries.

As for LG and Sharp, both companies have been linked to Apple before for the supply of iPad displays. Sharp was originally said to be pushing for the third-generation iPad to feature its IGZO technology, but it was said in January that the company's IGZO displays failed to meet Apple's standards.

Last week, the NPD Group's DisplaySearch indicated that all three companies — Samsung, Sharp and LG — were experiencing difficulty in manufacturing Retina displays for Apple's third-generation iPad. However, it did not indicate that Sharp and LG were outright unable to supply any components to Apple.

The new display uses advanced technology such as Super High Aperture pixel design to achieve a pixel density of 264-per-inch. That's a higher resolution display than a 1080p high-definition television.




Even if Samsung is the only provider of iPad Retina displays to Apple, it may not have a significant impact on Apple's ability to manufacture third-generation iPads. A separate report on Tuesday from analyst Peter Misek with Jefferies said concerns that Retina display availability could be constrained for Apple are "overblown.

Misek sees Apple building between 12 million and 15 million iPads in the first quarter of calendar 2012, with production growing to as high as 20 million next quarter.

[ View article on AppleInsider ]
post #2 of 159
Awkward...

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #3 of 159
Note that supplier means manufacturer, not the inventor or creator of the display panel. There role as supplier is much like Foxconn is to building iPhone... though considerably more automated.

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #4 of 159
Who designed these display panels, Apple or Samsung? Does Apple have the exclusive rights to use these panels?
post #5 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

Who designed these display panels, Apple or Samsung? Does Apple have the exclusive rights to use these panels?

Good questions for a forthcoming legal dispute ??? ... one more ...
post #6 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

Who designed these display panels, Apple or Samsung? Does Apple have the exclusive rights to use these panels?

LG likely designed the panels with Apple's backing. Apple likely has exclusive rights as the 326 PPI IPS panels used in the iPhone 4 finally appeared in an LG phone in January 2012, so that was about an 18 month exclusivity.

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #7 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Awkward...

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.
post #8 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Note that supplier means manufacturer, not the inventor or creator of the display panel. There role as supplier is much like Foxconn is to building iPhone... though considerably more automated.

My question is this: Was the Retina display engineered by Apple (in other words, do they own the intellectual property to back up the product) or by Samsung?

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #9 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

My question is this: Was the Retina display engineered by Apple (in other words, do they own the intellectual property to back up the product) or by Samsung?

We won't know until a retina display shows up on a Samsung device and no one sues.
post #10 of 159
This means a reverse-engineered Samsung Galaxy Tab S II SuperbX HD will be out within a few months...
post #11 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

Who designed these display panels, Apple or Samsung? Does Apple have the exclusive rights to use these panels?

I believe it's Sharp, but Sharp & LG reportedly had difficulty manufacturing the display panels in volume.

http://www.reghardware.com/2012/03/1...aperture_tech/

Well, at least we now know where Apple would be without Samsung's flash, cpu, or display.
post #12 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

Not sure what your point is.. Apple hasn't invented anything either. Apple is a marketing company.

I am not sure you know what you're talking about.

A bit odd for a guy commenting that he's "Not sure what [a poster's] point is."
post #13 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

My question is this: Was the Retina display engineered by Apple (in other words, do they own the intellectual property to back up the product) or by Samsung?

Thinking about how they like to advertise when they are responsible for the IP plus no display patent tech, that I can recall, makes me think they are probably just investors in their displays getting made years before it would otherwise be possible. The reward for pushing this tech seems to be an exclusivity.

But that doesn't mean Samsung is behind it. Based on what I've seen Samsung has little interst in developing LCDs. This seems like LG's tech to me. So why is it possible Samsung could be building LG tech requested by Apple? simple: LG doesn't have the quality for the needed scale. This is a completely different area of business and one where Samsung excels. Just compare their Android phones with other Android vendors.

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #14 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

I am not sure you know what you're talking about.

A bit odd for a guy commenting that he's "Not sure what [a poster's] point is."

Really? And you do?
post #15 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

Who designed these display panels, Apple or Samsung? Does Apple have the exclusive rights to use these panels?

THese panels are only improvements on previous panels. We now all big panel makers do a lot of research in this area. I would say there is a large number of cross licenced patents between the big manufacturers. Apple probably have a few of their own.

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.
post #16 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

I believe it's Sharp, but Sharp & LG reportedly had difficulty manufacturing the display panels in volume.

Well, at least we now know where Apple would be without Samsung.

Sharp offered IGZO technology, but could not meet the demands of apple. The current panels do not seem to be IGZO, so it must be Samsung or LG.
As IGZO technology would deliver the same image but without additional backlights, I would think apple would have preferred it.
Putting these two together, I think it's Samsung tech. Why let Samsung build panels with LG tech, you would have asked Samsung to build IGZO. All speculation of course, maybe IGZO wasn't ready for prime-time at all.
post #17 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

LG likely designed the panels with Apple's backing. Apple likely has exclusive rights as the 326 PPI IPS panels used in the iPhone 4 finally appeared in an LG phone in January 2012, so that was about an 18 month exclusivity.

I don't recall ever seeing a story about Apple engineering their own displays. I'd personally think it more likely that Apple put out a set of specs they wanted matched and took bids on who could meet the requirements. Just a guess of course in the absence of any evidence that it was Apple who did the design work rather than a display manufacturer. Always a possibility Apple did the screen engineering or some significant part of it.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #18 of 159
I don't care who the supplier is... And I take all these rumors with a grain of salt. Next week there will be another report with Emerson as the supplier.
post #19 of 159
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.
post #20 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

I don't recall ever seeing a story about Apple engineering their own displays. I'd personally think it more likely that Apple put out a set of specs they wanted matched and took bids on who could meet the requirements. Just a guess of course in the absence of any evidence that it was Apple who did the design work rather than a display manufacturer. Always a possibility Apple did the screen engineering or some significant part of it.

No where in my post did I state or imply Apple's IP is responsible for the displays. My comment starts out with "LG likely designed the panels..." Then I mention exclusivity which means a deal which further solidifies my comment that Apple didn't own engineer the displays, not to mention my comment of Apple backing LG.

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #21 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post

Not sure what your point is.. Apple hasn't invented anything either. Apple is a marketing company.

Brilliant¡

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #22 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter236 View Post

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.
post #23 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

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.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #24 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nairb View Post

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/
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 #25 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by peter236 View Post

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 View Post

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/

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #26 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

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.
post #27 of 159
So why are they suing each other again???
post #28 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

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.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #29 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk View Post


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.
post #30 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post

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.


Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

And not without precedent. Look at the situation with Corning and Gorilla Glass. Seems like a similar situation.

That Samsung is so altruistic¡

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

 

Goodbyeee jragosta :: http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160864/jragosta-joseph-michael-ragosta

Reply
post #31 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techboy View Post

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.
post #32 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

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 View Post

So why are they suing each other again???

Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

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 View Post

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/
post #33 of 159
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.
post #34 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nairb View Post

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"
post #35 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post

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.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #36 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

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?
post #37 of 159
So why is your rival creating your product?
Isn't this like the mafia sharing family secrets with the police chief?
post #38 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

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.
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 #39 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

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?
post #40 of 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

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.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Samsung is sole supplier of Apple's iPad Retina displays - report
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Samsung is sole supplier of Apple's iPad Retina displays - report